Jesus=Prophet?

[ryupower]

Hello! :)

Christian here...and I've got a question to you people:

Why's Jesus just a prophet for you guys? What disproves that he's Allah's son?

Please don't flame me! I'm curious to know some things about Islam...

[cabdirazzaq]

Acually I have to go to school now, meanwhile look at this verse and tell me what its saying:

Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good–except God alone." (From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)

[Kilgore Trout]

Christian trolls. :rolleyes:
.
Ha! I love it! :D

[ryupower]

Christian trolls. :rolleyes:
.
Ha! I love it! :D How am I trolling?
I just want to see other religious views on Jesus, therefore I ask! :( :(

[cabdirazzaq]

Hello!


Why's Jesus just a prophet for you guys? What disproves that he's Allah's son?
In islam the most important part in our belief system, the most dearest to all muslims - the word for which the prophet Muhammed (peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) strove to teach the world for 23 years- , the words being La ilaha Illa-Allah meaning ; there is no god(worthy of worship) except God(Allah). Thus we deny anything to be worshiped except God alone, wether this is a son or a partner. This is what is mentioned in the Quran, in chapter Nisaa(Women) [interpretation of the meaning]:

Say not: "Three!'' Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One God, hallowed be He above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.

As muslims we must believe that the OT and NT were sent down from Allah(may he be exalted)
It is He Who has sent down the Book to you with truth, confirming what came before it. And He sent down the Tawrah(Torah) and the Injil(The gospel) [Quran 3.3]
but we do not follow them because of the fact that:
(1). Different nations were sent with different rules. I believe in the prophet Joseph(may peace be upon him) but I do not follow the rulings of his age(like the one were the thief is punished by becoming a slave).
(2). We believe that these scriptures have been altered and that innovations have arisen because of this, such as trinity.
The word trinity is not mentioned what so ever in the bible nor did Jesus(peace be upon him) preach this to his people, nor did he ever say(you are welcome to disapprove me): "worship me" or "I am god" yet all all the prophets mentioned to their -people several times- that they indeed were prophets. If he was God or part of God, why did he not make this clear, why does he always exhort them to worship God and not himself as christians are very fond of?

"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.(not three in one) (From the NIV Bible, Mark 12:29)"

Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD

""Why do you call me good? Jesus answered. "No one is good except God alone(From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"
I would really like to know; if he is the son of God, why does he not accept being called good or All-good, him sayíng "except God" shows clearly that he is not God.

Logic and monotheism is acually what disapproves that Christ(peace be upon him) is Gods son. Jesus(peace be upon him) ate, he drank, he went to the "bathroom", he prayed to God, he came out from a women and he will die. Now the question is, does God eat, drink, use the toilet, pray to him self and come out from a womans private parts? No, may he be exalted! Thus, this only leaves 2 options.
(1). He and the father can't be the same(he is not God or his son), as we see above they are totally different.
(2). You hold belief in atleast two different gods.

I will not deny that many christians do this to please God, but I will not accept it either.

...We sent `Isa the son of Maryam, and gave him the Injil. And We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him, compassion and mercy. But the monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them, but (they sought it) only to please Allah therewith, but that they did not observe it with the right observance. [Quran 57.26]

[cabdirazzaq]

Now what makes you believe, he should be worshipped?

[ryupower]

Hello!

In islam the most important part in our belief system, the most dearest to all muslims - the word for which the prophet Muhammed (peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) strove to teach the world for 23 years- , the words being La ilaha Illa-Allah meaning ; there is no god(worthy of worship) except God(Allah). Thus we deny anything to be worshiped except God alone, wether this is a son or a partner. This is what is mentioned in the Quran, in chapter Nisaa(Women) [interpretation of the meaning]:

Say not: "Three!'' Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One God, hallowed be He above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.

As muslims we must believe that the OT and NT were sent down from Allah(may he be exalted)
It is He Who has sent down the Book to you with truth, confirming what came before it. And He sent down the Tawrah(Torah) and the Injil(The gospel) [Quran 3.3]
but we do not follow them because of the fact that:
(1). Different nations were sent with different rules. I believe in the prophet Joseph(may peace be upon him) but I do not follow the rulings of his age(like the one were the thief is punished by becoming a slave).
(2). We believe that these scriptures have been altered and that innovations have arisen because of this, such as trinity.
The word trinity is not mentioned what so ever in the bible nor did Jesus(peace be upon him) preach this to his people, nor did he ever say(you are welcome to disapprove me): "worship me" or "I am god" yet all all the prophets mentioned to their -people several times- that they indeed were prophets. If he was God or part of God, why did he not make this clear, why does he always exhort them to worship God and not himself as christians are very fond of?

"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.(not three in one) (From the NIV Bible, Mark 12:29)"

Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD

""Why do you call me good? Jesus answered. "No one is good except God alone(From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"
I would really like to know; if he is the son of God, why does he not accept being called good or All-good, him sayíng "except God" shows clearly that he is not God.

Logic and monotheism is acually what disapproves that Christ(peace be upon him) is Gods son. Jesus(peace be upon him) ate, he drank, he went to the "bathroom", he prayed to God, he came out from a women and he will die. Now the question is, does God eat, drink, use the toilet, pray to him self and come out from a womans private parts? No, may he be exalted! Thus, this only leaves 2 options.
(1). He and the father can't be the same(he is not God or his son), as we see above they are totally different.
(2). You hold belief in atleast two different gods.

I will not deny that many christians do this to please God, but I will not accept it either.

...We sent `Isa the son of Maryam, and gave him the Injil. And We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him, compassion and mercy. But the monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them, but (they sought it) only to please Allah therewith, but that they did not observe it with the right observance. [Quran 57.26]
I disagree on the 'god is one, not three'. Why?
In Genesis 1, God said 'let us make man in OUR image' , therefore, there must have been more than one entity. The Texts are PROVEN to not have been altered, - the dead sea scrolls. And why would one alter it?

If you do not mind, I'll explain the whole Jesus is God thing to you:

Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, who was described in the old testament to be God in the Flesh.
Therefore he WAS God in the Flesh.
It is often mentioned that he IS the son of God, and he rose from the dead, with over 500 eye witnesses. (cor. 15:6 )

Jesus didn't say things like 'worship me' because he couldn't be worshipped while he was on Earth because he had to be resurrected first.
:)

[cabdirazzaq]

I disagree on the 'god is one, not three'. Why?
In Genesis 1, God said 'let us make man in OUR image' , therefore, there must have been more than one entity. The Texts are PROVEN to not have been altered, - the dead sea scrolls. And why would one alter it?

If you do not mind, I'll explain the whole Jesus is God thing to you:

Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, who was described in the old testament to be God in the Flesh.
Therefore he WAS God in the Flesh.
It is often mentioned that he IS the son of God, and he rose from the dead, with over 500 eye witnesses. (cor. 15:6 )

Jesus didn't say things like 'worship me' because he couldn't be worshipped while he was on Earth because he had to be resurrected first.

AV(King James)…but Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the saints - Hos 11:12
NAS(New american standard): Judah is also unruly against God, even against the Holy One who is faithful
NIV(New international): Judah is unruly against God, even against the faithful Holy One.

AV: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
NAS: footnote casts doubt
NIV:OMITTED


Can you (as you have kindly noted that the bible is not altered) tell me which one of the above is the correct and which is not Gods words but mans?

Then there is another problem, we have a catholic bible having SEVEN more books than the ones protestants use, which one is the word of God?

Then there is another problem, the verse of 1 John 5:7 , "proving" trinity:

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."(AV)

There is a problem with this verse, it is not present in any manuscript before the sixteenth century according to notes in the New international version.
Therefor the RSV deleted it without even a footnote and the NAS says ;
For there arethree that testify:
the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

There is yet another problem, a huge one before we can accept the bible as unaltered, the problem with authorship. Who wrote the bible?
Lets look at notes from the NIV, shall we?

About the gospel of mark it says:
"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1488)"

There is [atleast] one problem with this gospel though, it gets strange at the end.

"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"

These verses say that christians shall take up serpants with their hands and that they will drink poison without getting hurt???

In the notes we find these following comments:

Acts: "Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)"

Hebrew: "The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)" [the writes is totally UNKNOWN]

This was the NT, in the OT we get more confused since a whole of the books are very doubtful since the writers are not known at all.
It may be difficult for a christians toanswer the above statements, but can you answer if these verses below are the words of Paul or those of God?

11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
12 I do not permit(who is I?) a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.[1 Timothy]

I'm sorry if I insulted you but I cannot accept the bible of today as the words of God, it was changed because of money and to please people.

Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.[Quran]

[ryupower]

AV(King James)…but Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the saints - Hos 11:12
NAS(New american standard): Judah is also unruly against God, even against the Holy One who is faithful
NIV(New international): Judah is unruly against God, even against the faithful Holy One.

AV: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
NAS: footnote casts doubt
NIV:OMITTED


Can you (as you have kindly noted that the bible is not altered) tell me which one of the above is the correct and which is not Gods words but mans? Oh that's what you ment! I thought you were talking about the current Hebrew Bible, which most are translated by.
You cannot forget that those are the most common Bibles, but there are others that are secondary, and they are translated from the HebrewGreek/Latin scriptures. The one I go by is the most accurate, for it's the Luther Translation in German.



Then there is another problem, we have a catholic bible having SEVEN more books than the ones protestants use, which one is the word of God?
Those seven other books weren't translated from the original texts, Catholosism is very traditional, it's been edited in order to get Pagans in. They have a bunch of extras.


Then there is another problem, the verse of 1 John 5:7 , "proving" trinity:

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."(AV)

There is a problem with this verse, it is not present in any manuscript before the sixteenth century according to notes in the New international version.
Therefor the RSV deleted it without even a footnote and the NAS says ;
For there arethree that testify:
the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.
That's not really a problem, it basicly means the same thing. Read the Hebrew, it ain't got any alternations like this.


There is yet another problem, a huge one before we can accept the bible as unaltered, the problem with authorship. Who wrote the bible?
Lets look at notes from the NIV, shall we?

About the gospel of mark it says:
"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1488)"

There is [atleast] one problem with this gospel though, it gets strange at the end.

"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"

These verses say that christians shall take up serpants with their hands and that they will drink poison without getting hurt???

In the notes we find these following comments:

Acts: "Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)"

Hebrew: "The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)" [the writes is totally UNKNOWN]

This was the NT, in the OT we get more confused since a whole of the books are very doubtful since the writers are not known at all.
It may be difficult for a christians toanswer the above statements, but can you answer if these verses below are the words of Paul or those of God?

11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
12 I do not permit(who is I?) a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.[1 Timothy]

I'm sorry if I insulted you but I cannot accept the bible of today as the words of God, it was changed because of money and to please people. No offense. :)
This is the only person that is unknown in the NT, I believe it was the mistranslation and it was really luke! ;)

Or maybe he got killed, and another took over....who knows? Maybe it was lost? That's why people want to see if it has the same claims somewhere else in the Bible.

And don't tell the Jews about the OT thing! :eek:
They'll kill ya' for it! ^^;


Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.[Quran] Is that about the Bible?