Islam, Muslim / Christian Forum - Welcome All

Hi Pete,

Apparently I have hit a nerve, but I just thought that since your so fond of quoting form the scriptures of others, (even though it is glaringly clear you haven't a clue to the meaning of what you are quoting), I would play along. You insist that I have committed blasphemy, but you should realize in my eyes you too have been commuting blasphemy.

Now, instead of addressing my post, you ask that I stop the quotes from the Bible, yet at the same time you want me to respond to your flagrantly ignorant quotes from my Nobel Book?!!!!

How does that work?

When filmmaker Mel Gibson prepared his script for his film “The Passion of the Christ,” he must have found the Pshitta’s82 translation of Paraclete as “Paraqlayta” problematic for obvious reasons. It would have been awkward for an Aramaic-speaking Jesus, in the midst of a discourse with his Jewish disciples, to use a recognizable Greek word with a Semitic twist. He rather opted for the translation as it occurs in the Syriac lectionaries used by the Assyrian churches in Iraq, also known as the Ancient Apostolic Church of the East. In these texts, the word for Paraclete is rendered “Munahma,” which according to author Karen Armstrong, may be equivalent to the Arabic Ahmad, and certainly sounds as if they are derived from a common root. Therefore, the scene as it occurs in the film has “Jesus” say, “Do not be afraid, the Helper (Munahma) will come, who speaks the truth about God (Allah).” Nineteenth century Scottish orientalist William Muir, who once said that Islam is the “only undisguised and formidable antagonist of Christianity,” claimed in his book “The Life of Mahomet” that there were Arabic translations of the Gospel of John from the eighth and ninth centuries CE that translated Paraclete as “Ahmad,” albeit erroneously according to Muir.
In John 16:7, Jesus makes it clear that the coming of the Paraclete is directly contingent upon his (Jesus’) departure: “ἐὰν γὰρ μὴ ἀπέλθω ὁ παράκληÏ,,οÏ, οὐκ ἐλεύσεÏ,,αι πρὸÏ, á½'μᾶÏ,” (For if I do not go, the Paraclete will not come unto you). This is interesting because the orthodox has consistently told us that the Paraclete and the Holy Spirit are one and the same. But if the Paraclete and the Holy Spirit is essentially the same person, are we then to suppose that Jesus and his disciples were completely devoid of him? The Gospel of Luke tells us that the Holy Spirit was with Elizabeth (1:41), John the Baptist (1:15), Zacharias (1:67), as well as with Simeon (2:25). All of these people chronologically predated Jesus Christ, yet the latter says clearly in John that the Paraclete had not yet arrived.

The Synod at Constantinople in 381 CE testifies to the fact that the early Christian church also found the Johannine readings about the Paraclete problematic and thus attempted to better define his nature and function. The most crucial verdict arrived at by the bishops of the Council was undoubtedly the judgment that the Holy Spirit was co-equal, co-eternal, and co-substantial with the Father and Son and therefore fully God, the third person of a triune deity. The old Nicene Creed hammered out over fifty years earlier was revised and the Niceo Constantinopolitan Creed was born. The bishops proposed a creative solution to the problem of the apparent incongruities between the Holy Spirit and the Paraclete of the Fourth Gospel. The Cappadocian Fathers, representing the orthodox findings, concluded that the Holy Spirit possesses the divine attribute of pre-eternality, meaning that he eternally proceeds from the Father (and scandalously from the Son as well [filioque] in the Western churches), but is also sent to the earth at certain times in history. In other words, the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds but is also economically sent.

Therefore, when Jesus speaks of the Paraclete coming after his departure, he is simply referring to the coming of the Spirit to the physical world in temporal terms, and just as the Son was eternally begotten by God before the creation of time and matter, yet economically sent into the world over two thousand years ago, the Holy Spirit also pre-existed and was sent, not once, but many times into the world. This solution, however, still fails to adequately account for the presence of the Holy Spirit before and during the ministry of Christ. When Jesus made the conditional statement recorded by John in 16:7, the Paraclete was clearly not with him on earth yet apparently accompanied his cousin John the Baptist and his mother Elizabeth. This also creates a major problem when trying to reconcile the Augustinian orthodox notion that the presence of the Son necessitates the presence of the Father and Holy Spirit and that all three persons are inseparable in their actions. The intercommunion of the three persons “guarantees the involvement (of all three).”

The theological gymnastics of the early orthodox, as well as the vastly diverse opinions regarding the nature of Christ during the first four centuries of the Common Era, demonstrate the obvious and painful truth that the deficiencies lie in the scriptures themselves. There are over 5,500 manuscripts of the New Testament in Greek, from credit-card sized John Ryland’s papyrus number 52 (P52) to the vast א01, but no two of these manuscripts are identical. John Mill’s 1707 CE attempt at an eclectic text of the Greek New Testament led him to state in his primitive apparatus that he found over 30,000 differences in the one hundred or so manuscripts that he had at this disposal. The irreconcilable Christologies of the synoptic evangelists coupled with John’s Logos simply render it impossible to arrive at a coherent and consistent profession of Christian faith. Even a theologian as early as Origen of Alexandria (d. 254 CE) once complained:
“The differences among the manuscripts have become great, either through the negligence of some copyists or through the perverse audacity of others; they either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please” (emphasis mine).

Consider also Origen’s Pagan opponent, Celsus, and Dionysius, the orthodox bishop of Corinth (d. circa 171 CE) who said respectively: “Some believers, as though from a drinking bout, go so far as to oppose themselves and alter the original text of the gospel three or four or several times over, and they change its character to enable them to deny difficulties in the face of criticism.” “When my fellow-Christians invited me to write to them I did so. These the devil’s apostles have filled with tares, taking away some things and adding others. For them the woe is reserved. Small wonder then if some have dared to tamper even with the word of the Lord himself, when they have conspired to mutilate my own humble efforts.”

John 16:13 reads: á½...Ï,,αν δὲ á¼"λθῃ ἐκεῖνοÏ, Ï,,ὸ πνεῦμα Ï,,ῆÏ, ἀληθείαÏ, ὁδηγήσει á½'μᾶÏ, εἰÏ, πάσαν Ï,,ῆν ἀληθείαν οὐ γὰρ λαλήσει ἀφ᾽ á¼'αÏ...Ï,,οῦ ἀλλ᾽ á½...σα á¼,ν ἀκούσῃ λαλήσει καὶ Ï,,á½° ἐρχόμενα ἀναγγελεῖ á½'μῖν “However when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will show you things to come.”

After a heated exchange between Jesus and a group of aggressive Pharisees, in which the latter accuses by implication the former of being “born of fornication” (John 8:41), Jesus unleashes a whirlwind rebuttal culminating with the claim “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58). The enraged Jews, apparently having no interest in the Law’s due process, are immediately compelled to pick up stones and deal with the gross blasphemer themselves. Alas, Jesus slips through the very midst of them and so “passed by” unharmed (John 8:59). It is interesting to note that before Jesus drives his final nail in the proverbial Pharisaic coffin, so to speak, he stated that Abraham rejoiced to see his (Jesus’) day, and when he saw it, he was glad (John 8:56). The Jews retort by reminding the young Nazarene that he had not even reached his fiftieth year, how could he have seen Abraham? â€" A man who strutted the earth eighteen centuries earlier. The problem in obvious: Jesus never said that he had seen Abraham, but only that Abraham had seen his, meaning Jesus’, day. This misunderstanding, however, is summarily overshadowed by the next verse in which Jesus ostensibly claims to possess ontological precedence over the ancient Patriarch of the Jews, hence the ensuing provocation to pick up stones.
Both the Jews, as well as the vast majority of Christian theologians, since the composition of the Fourth Gospel have qualified this statement as a claim of deity made by Jesus. John, however, who is no doubt extremely versed in the Septuagint, chose not to include in the proclamation of Christ the crucial second half of the statement given to Moses by God in Exodus chapter three at the burning bush, where the Hebrew is translated ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν, meaning literally, “I am He who is.” John tells his audience that Jesus only said, “πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί” (Before Abraham was I am), without the highly mystical ὁ ὤν, which consists of the masculine singular nominative article and the nominative active participle of εἰμί.

In other words, John elects to leave off the divine aspect of Exodus 3:14, namely “The one who is,” thus causing Jesus to fall noticeably short of possessing absolute pre-eternal existence. Jesus did exist in some capacity before Abraham, but not in an absolute or essential sense, or as the followers of the anathematized Arius (256 â€" 336 CE)10 used to proclaim “ayn pote hote ouk ayn” meaning “there was a time when he was not.” Arius affirmed Christ’s “pre-existence” in relative terms and said that the Son’s causal subordination (from Origen of Alexandria, d. 253 CE) became also the Son’s temporal subordination and essential inferiority.11 Certainly Arius knew of Jesus’ statement in John but was simply not convinced that it constituted a divine claim. Hence the above Muslim exegesis of John 8:58 finds unmistakably established precedence in pre-Islamic times, amongst the very group which prompted Constantine to call the first ever ecumenical Synod no less.
In addition to this, the fact that John’s three evangelical predecessors do not even record the statement yet are very intent on informing their readers about Jesus’ choice of conveyance while entering Jerusalem, has led many scholars of the New Testament, Bart Ehrman included, to conclude that the authenticity of such so-called “I am statements” are highly suspect. Jesus riding a donkey into Jerusalem certainly fulfilled ancient prophecy, but I cannot possibly imagine why Matthew, a supposed ear and eye-witness to Christ, would not record any of the crucial Johannine “divine” claims of Jesus if in fact the latter made such statements.

Copied from: "Prophet Muhammed In The Bible", By Ali Ataei. Available free

EXACTLY: As you said you couldn't give an answer because it would go against the words given to you by God according your scripture.

For Him to take the form of a man, according to ours would be an abomination-a sin beyond any other that is unforgivable if one dies in that state, unless he or she repents and turns to the one and only lord.

As I mentioned to you earlier there is no religion that exists and that has ever existed that does not recognize the existence of the one and true God. Like you, what they claim and have always claimed is that either the spirit of God resides in the idol or image they make and worship, or that God has taken the form of what they worship. In my religion that is idolatry.

Hi Pete

Your logic astounds me!

Let me ask you this: Is your God able to decide to  throw everybody into hell, and I mean everybody-Christians, Muslims, Babies... regardless of faith? Does He possess the power for such a decision or not?  A simple yes or no please

Hi Pete

Your logic astounds me!

Let me ask you this: Is your God able to decide through everybody in hell, and I mean everybody-Christians, Muslims, Babies... regardless of faith? Does He possess the power for such a decision or not?  A simple yes or no please

Good morning Peter,

I will today take a big step and quote from your Holy Book The Bible. But please understand that I am not a scholar of the Bible so forgive my ignorance if it shows.
In the Bible it states:  “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” I believe what Christians have taken to mean by the “word” is Jesus (peace be upon him) the son of blessed Mary.
In the Quran the “word” refers to Gods command “Be” as in the following:

“She said: My Lord! How can I have a child when no mortal hath touched me? He said: So (it will be). Allah createth what He will. If He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is.”

“The Originator of the heavens and the earth! When He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is.”

We were taught that prior to the creation of the universe and everything in it there was God, He who has no beginning and end, who then “commanded” the creation of the universe and everything else in it, with the “word” Be! And it was. Gods command connotes His intention, embodied in the “word” (be) which contains all the information needed for fulfilling what was intended. The “word” is as the words “clean your room” uttered as a command to a child to go tidy their room.  Ones uttered the parent need not specify what goes where or how, or hold the Childs hand to guide them through the cleaning. The child hears the words, obeys the command and tidies the room, because the child already possesses the knowledge of how to do so either through observation and/or through direct instruction from the parents. So too is the command of God, in the “word” was the knowledge of how to create the universe (s) and everything in it, just as a seed containing all information(knowledge) or DNA of a particular plant so that one’s it is planted it metamorphose into that plant. The universe and everything found in it came about through this word or knowledge which as a seed is still metamorphosing and will do so until the end of time.

We believe God manifests Himself to people through His word or creations so that they may and investigate and learn from it for their benefit as well as gain in appreciation of His majesty, Power, and love that He has for His creations, so that they may believe. It is out of love and mercy that he did not just poof bring everything into existence but rather through knowledge so that we may decipher, learn and use it to advance our living here on earth. That’s why we are able to study reproduction and come up with cloning, which has the potential of curing cancer and many other terrible illnesses.

We do not believe that God manifests Himself to the prophets or anyone through the Holy Spirit but rather strengthens them through it. See Peter, we believe that Muhammad (peace be upon him) the slave of God and mercy of mankind, was sent to correct what has been corrupted from Christianity just as Jesus (peace be upon him) the miracle of God was sent to correct what had been corrupted from Judaism. This is also what I meant when I mentioned to you earlier that the two religions may use the same terms and names but are in fact very different.

Of course knowledge is with God so may He forgive any mistakes which I may have made in conveying this to you, but to find out more check Ibn Kathir’s tafsir on the topic.

Definitely not in the way the Jews or Christians[/b] believe, which is why in this instance I deliberately used divine energy instead of Holy Spirit. By now I know you my friend. The meaning of Holy spirit that you use is not the same as we use for creation. For creation Holy spirit or ruh means divine energy. The Holy spirit as used in Christianity is closer to the ruh we believe only Prophets are strengthened with. That is why I explained to you that ruh is preceded by Amr, which denotes Gods intention in the instance it is been refereed.

Many like to suggest that the three religions are similar, something I totally disagree. In my humble opinion Judaism and Christianity have always been an element of the culture of its adherents hence, like all elements of culture they change to suite the desires of the adherents.Islam on the other hand is a way of life that produces based on laws and therefore produces culture.

Hi Peter,

You read a verse from the Quran that you have no idea what it means, so you give it your own meaning and than you expect me to give an answer to what is a product of your ignorance. In other words you wish to create the rules and be judge, jury and executioner at the same time. What do I say to that?

Ruh in the Quran for your information is used to refer to:

1. The Angel Gabriel

2. Knowledge or divine energy

Again for your information Ruh is always preceded by AMR, which means command, which denotes Gods intention which is absolute whether in the form of knowledge or through the Arch Angel, and must happen as in the case of the Birth of Jesus (peace be upon him). This is a whole field of knowledge that involves understanding the difference between what God intends and what He wants as well as all the attributes of knowledge and intention.

You must realize peter that ignorance is a terrible thing and it is always better to ask, understand than pass judgement. Indeed the greatest knowledge is for one to admit they do not know and are willing to learn

Hi Peter,

Thanks for the invitation to join your religion, obviously you are very passionate about it (whether you understand it or not is besides the point) so I take that as a sign that you care . I would of course have to refuse for my heart is filled with the love of the one and only God, who cares and loves me so much that He personally has assured me of direct access to Him, when ever and wherever I choose. I come to Him walking He says and He will come running, I ask and He promises to answer, I repent and He promises forgiveness. All this and all He asks in return is I live my life here in the healthiest way possible and fulfill my duty towards my family, neighbors, community and ensure that my behavior including what I say and do is a source of benefit to them and not Harm.  He admonished me against taking for a conscience other than He, be it science, my culture, emotions, desire... for that would amount to ascribing partners unto Hm or shirk. How can I not heed such a warning from one who has shown me so much love and care? How can I steep so low as to worship that which is of human creation or a figment of imagination and not honor the invitation of The Mighty, The Just, The Beneficent, The Merciful?

Now I invite you Peter to the religion of Al-Islam or The Surrender. Surrender yourself, your worries, your past, your future... to Him. You do not need an intercessor or an intermediary-YOU HAVE DIRECT ACCESS!

Thanks for the debate my friend.

Hi Peter,

Fanaticism as I mentioned to you earlier is when we allow our heart or emotions to think for us rather than our mind.   Try as you may though you cannot get me to disparage my fellow Christian brethren, because my friend you too don’t represent Christianity. In fact we are taught that no one can represent Gods religion except God. This is why we have no excommunication, or confessions of sin. Everyone’s relationship with God is deeply personal and only He can judge.

Now let’s go back to the question at hand which you have not answered by the way, but rather avoided through biblical quotations: Do you worship the one and only true God (God conscience)? Simple answer with a definition of worship will do please.

Hi Peter,

Now you are not only blatantly giving meanings to verses you obviously have no clue what they mean but also choosing what you want to see in my posts. I have already defined and explained to you what constitutes shirk, is that not judging what sin is, or would you rather I judge all Christians by declaring them idol worshippers?

Please go back and read my posts free of emotions. Emotions tend to blind us from objectively taking in information.

Please my friend understand that just because we allow ourselves to open our minds and view ideas through the eyes of other peoples does not mean we agree with them, but simply opens the way for understanding and mutual respect.

Hi Peter,

Assigning partners to God is what we call idol worship in Islam. You can’t give your own meaning to verses and base your arguments on that my friend, its illogical. In other words you can’t set your own rules and then be judge and executioner!

For your information we are not even allowed to pray to Muhammad (SAW), or refer to him as anything other than a normal human being, with human emotions and desires who was sent with a message, and thus strengthened with the Holy Spirit. We are not allowed spiritual leaders; every man is responsible and accountable for his actions to a God who is forgiving and merciful. It is through His Grace we believe we will make it to heaven as long as we combine faith with effort to do good.

Again for your information even when and after the verse in question was revealed many who were involve with Shirk came to the prophet and accepted Islam. What you’re suggesting in fact is so illogical that its bordering on the ridiculous, because if what you are suggesting is true than no one would have been Muslims.

Assigning partners to God which means taking something far a conscience other than God is shirk. You also want me to tell you whether or not Christians are involved in Shirk. In my religion Peter only God can judge, for each person is only accountable for himself and how well he behaves with others, hence what you do is between you and your God, only you can answer that question. As a Muslim I am only asked to remind you what God expects of all of us. But if you’re interested in what God says about the Jews and Christians I have selected some verses for you:




They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)!

"Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians -- whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve" (2:62, 5:69, and many other verses).

"...and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, 'We are Christians,' because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant" (5:82).

"O you who believe! Be helpers of God -- as Jesus the son of Mary said to the Disciples, 'Who will be my helpers in (the work of) God?' Said the disciples, 'We are God's helpers!' Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved. But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed" (61:14).

"If only they [i.e. Christians] had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course, but many of them follow a course that is evil" (5:66).

"Oh People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion, nor say of God anything but the truth. Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was (no more than) a messenger of God, and His Word which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him. So believe in God and His messengers. Say not, 'Trinity.' Desist! It will be better for you, for God is One God, Glory be to Him! (Far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs" (4:171).

Quote from: Peter on January 10, 2013, 11:58:47 AM

Quote from: khalib on January 10, 2013, 11:18:09 AM
In Islam Shirk or idolatry means taking anything for a conscience other than God. What one takes for a conscience is what they have faith or trust in above everything else, because that is what he/she will weigh every decision against to decide whether or not it is right-wrong, moral-immoral, ethical-unethical and so on. There is no religion in existence today or in the past that has ever denied the existence of the one and true God, therefore it doesn’t matter if we believe in the existence of the one and only true God, what we choose for a conscience decides whether or not we are engaged in idol worship or not. Take for instance a man who claims to believe in the existence of God, but carries a small symbol or idol around their neck or in their pocket that they pray to when in a dilemma, believing that that symbol will bring them closer to their lord. This is idol worship for this person has placed their trust in another other than God, and has sought guidance in another other than God. Why this is a grievous sin I can explain later if you wish but for the point I am trying to make now this should suffice.

Hi Peter,

Assigning partners to God is what we call idol worship in Islam. You can’t give your own meaning to verses and base your arguments on that my friend, its illogical. In other words you can’t set your own rules and then be judge and executioner!

For your information we are not even allowed to pray to Muhammad (SAW), or refer to him as anything other than a normal human being, with human emotions and desires who was sent with a message, and thus strengthened with the Holy Spirit. We are not allowed spiritual leaders; every man is responsible and accountable for his actions to a God who is forgiving and merciful. It is through His Grace we believe we will make it to heaven as long as we combine faith with effort to do good.

Again for your information even when and after the verse in question was revealed many who were involve with Shirk came to the prophet and accepted Islam. What you’re suggesting in fact is so illogical that its bordering on the ridiculous, because if what you are suggesting is true than no one would have been Muslims.

Assigning partners to God which means taking something far a conscience other than God is shirk. You also want me to tell you whether or not Christians are involved in Shirk. In my religion Peter only God can judge, for each person is only accountable for himself and how well he behaves with others, hence what you do is between you and your God, only you can answer that question. As a Muslim I am only asked to remind you what God expects of all of us. But if you’re interested in what God says about the Jews and Christians I have selected some verses for you:




They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)!

"Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians -- whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve" (2:62, 5:69, and many other verses).
"...and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, 'We are Christians,' because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant" (5:82).
"O you who believe! Be helpers of God -- as Jesus the son of Mary said to the Disciples, 'Who will be my helpers in (the work of) God?' Said the disciples, 'We are God's helpers!' Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved. But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed" (61:14).
"If only they [i.e. Christians] had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course, but many of them follow a course that is evil" (5:66).
"Oh People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion, nor say of God anything but the truth. Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was (no more than) a messenger of God, and His Word which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him. So believe in God and His messengers. Say not, 'Trinity.' Desist! It will be better for you, for God is One God, Glory be to Him! (Far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs" (4:171).



















































































































Most of the companions of the prophet including those closest to him who accepted Islam were engaged in idol worship, so no Peter, the verse you quoted does not and cannot mean God does not forgive idol worship.

It has nothing to do with idol worship. It has to do with assigning partners to Allah. Read it again and I will help you try to provide a straight answer this time.

4.048 Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed.

That says that Allah "forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him" period.
The sin being discussed would be a sin more "heinous" than any other sin, since "He forgiveth anything else".

Here's how your brethren put it in website after website: "The sin of shirk is to associate partners with Allah, basically this means to set up idols and false deities alongside Allah, granting them equal status to Allah, and to give them actions which are only reserved for God alone, such as worshipping them, making oaths to them, having fear and hope in them, and to sacrifice things in their name. All of this constitutes shirk, an example is the case of Jesus, those who set him up as a God, and invoke on him and pray to him are guilty of shirk, they are guilty of setting up a partner to the true God Allah."

So when a Christian confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, or even prays in Jesus name, has he committed the ONLY unforgivable, and absolutely most heinous sin, according to Muhammad. Isn't that right?

Quote from: khalib on January 10, 2013, 11:18:09 AMOtherwise the prophet (peace be upon him) would have been telling his closest companions that they are destined to hell. What it means is if you are a Muslim and choose something for a conscience other than God be it an idol, religious leader, prophet than you have died in a state of disbelieve and not as a Muslim, therefore you are not worthy of forgiveness or Gods grace. Personal responsibility is paramount in Islam and we cant give that over to anything or anyone.

Quote from: Peter on January 10, 2013, 11:46:56 AM
Please let me finish your prior post before addressing your next two.

Quote from: khalib on January 10, 2013, 08:49:37 AMIn fact how can even God expect us to believe in what does not make sense and is illogical on the basis of faith?

We don't have to rely solely on faith since the crucifixion of the Messiah was prophesied many hundreds of years in advance. Even hundreds of years before crucifixion was ever invented!

Psalms 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.   17 I may tell all my bones: they look [and] stare upon me.   18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

Matthew 27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/psalms_22.htm

Quote from: khalib on January 10, 2013, 08:49:37 AMThat would be injustice for it is He who created us to think with our minds and not heart. The way to the heart is through the mind; which is why information or knowledge based on logic increases ones faith and information that is illogical, but still accepted through faith is fanaticism. Fanaticism means we are guided by our emotions and desires, instead of God conscience

Can you defend your faith based on reason and invite people to accept salvation through your faith through the same?

If course I can. As I mentioned previously I can support it through fulfillment of prophecy, history, archaeology or geography. A whole forum section devoted to it:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=68.0
I would recommend that you do a web search now, like - click the link history archaeology of Mecca - to see if you can do the same regarding Islam.

But surely you aren't suggesting that you found Muhammad's Allah through logic, when the whole reason you believe that you pray five times a day, is because of Muhammad's claim that he rode on a "buraq" one night, from Mecca to Jerusalem, up to "paradise", and back to Mecca by morning. However there was never ever a single witness in the history of the world that ever saw a flying donkey-mule, or any witnesses to Muhammad's account of having ridden on such a thing. His followers are stuck taking his world for it.

Let alone that Muhammad claimed he went into the temple of the prophets, and prayed two rak'ahs in it, however the temple had actually been torn down five hundred years prior to his claim. Indeed during the time in history that Muhammad made his claim to have prayed in it, the temple mount was being used as a garbage dump.
Where is the "thinking" or "logic" in believing in Muhammad's story about the buraq my friend?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1253.0

Hi Peter,

We are conscious animals who not only have conscience but are conscious as well. To begin with Peter that is not why we pray in Islam. Another name for Islam as you may be aware is The Reminder. Praying five times a day is simply to remind us of our responsibilities as Muslims to ourselves, family, neighborhood and wider society. This is why we pray in congregation, and why we have nearby mosques to our homes which could be several in a neighborhood for our daily prayers, one neighborhood mosque for our Friday prayers that unites all the people of the same neighborhood under one roof under a leader or imam, and a community mosque bringing together people from many neighborhoods for the Eid prayer.  Thus the prayer not only serves the purpose of reminding us of our responsibilities, but unites us under a common purpose. It is also a time we socialize with one another and ask God for forgiveness and guidance five times a day as doctors, lawyers, teachers, fathers, mothers, sisters….

But even in the Quran it does mention that prayer on its own is not righteousness, but rather providing for the widow, orphan… is righteousness.  As for the journey you described peter, it is indeed part of our faith that we are required to believe through logic. But before I go on I would like to explain to you what I mean by logic. To understand this let us go back to Gods attributes one of which we said is THE JUST.  If He is truly THE JUST it would  then be illogical if someone tells me that only the dead children of Muslims will go to heaven and all others will not, even though they had no say in who gives birth to them, or the mental capacity to distinguish between right and wrong at such a young age.  God been able to create an animal that has eight heads each that is also half donkey and human though is not illogical for He is THE CREATOR who created me, you and all other animals in away He saw fit, hence it does not go against logic. It may of course go against science, but in Islam science is not our conscience. Please remember peter I never said Jesus(peace be upon) rising from the dead was illogical, what I said was your concept of sin and atonement was not logical to me, and that’s when you switched topics on me and started to quote from the Bible and Quran.

Quote from: Peter on January 10, 2013, 10:38:27 AM

Quote from: khalib on January 10, 2013, 08:49:37 AMYou have mostly responded to my previous post by using quotes from the bible, in what I believe is an effort to support your point of view. The problem with that though is as much as I respect the Bible and value my relationship with many good people who are Christians, I don’t believe the Bible is anywhere close to been the Word of God, just as am sure you also don’t believe what I believe in is anywhere even close to the words of God, so how can you use what I don’t believe in to respond to my points?

By Muhammad's 7th century the Gospel had been translated into every popular language in the known world, had been copied tens of thousands of times (some suggest a hundred thousand), and had been read all over the known world for centuries. Thus the Gospel of Muhammad's day, is necessarily the same Gospel we have today, or tens of thousands of copies in all those languages would have all had to have been erased, and then uniformly changed!
In that same 7th century Muhammad said:

Sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/

So are you suggesting that Muhammad was simply that ignorant to have given, what you apparently can only conclude was, such foolish advice? Perhaps that 21st century Muslims are just smarter than he was?

Yet the whole subject of the Gospel is the crucifixion, death and resurrection of the Messiah, the Lamb of God, who saves all from sin who have faith in His atoning blood.

Hi Peter,

Again you are misquoting what a verse in the Nobel Quran means. I don’t blame you though because the translation of the Quran is not the Quran but just that a translation, and we often see things that we want to see even in what is not possible for them to be in.

Our prophet (SAW) was sent for the mercy of humanity, but unfortunately when he came the Jews and Christians denied his prophet hood, just as the Jews denied the prophet hood of Jesus (peace be upon him). This verse is asking them to look in their Bible which foretells the coming of Muhammad (SAW). This is why it says if they still deny it after it has been foretold than they are rebelling against their own scripture. I am not going to quote which verses in the bible foretell the coming of Muhammed because a simple Google search will reveal thousands of sites to you showing you this.

Keep in mind also that the Bible you are probably quoting from is a translation and not the actual Bible.

In Islam Shirk or idolatry means taking anything for a conscience other than God. What one takes for a conscience is what they have faith or trust in above everything else, because that is what he/she will weigh every decision against to decide whether or not it is right-wrong, moral-immoral, ethical-unethical and so on. There is no religion in existence today or in the past that has ever denied the existence of the one and true God, therefore it doesn’t matter if we believe in the existence of the one and only true God, what we choose for a conscience decides whether or not we are engaged in idol worship or not. Take for instance a man who claims to believe in the existence of God, but carries a small symbol or idol around their neck or in their pocket that they pray to when in a dilemma, believing that that symbol will bring them closer to their lord. This is idol worship for this person has placed their trust in another other than God, and has sought guidance in another other than God. Why this is a grievous sin I can explain later if you wish but for the point I am trying to make now this should suffice.

Most of the companions of the prophet including those closest to him who accepted Islam were engaged in idol worship, so no Peter, the verse you quoted does not and cannot mean God does not forgive idol worship. Otherwise the prophet (peace be upon him) would have been telling his closest companions that they are destined to hell. What it means is if you are a Muslim and choose something for a conscience other than God be it an idol, religious leader, prophet than you have died in a state of disbelieve and not as a Muslim, therefore you are not worthy of forgiveness or Gods grace. Personal responsibility is paramount in Islam and we cant give that over to anything or anyone.

Hi Peter,

To answer your question: We are taught that God forgives all sins as long as one repents with sincerity.  But we must never forget that God is the best of judges and no one besides He can say or decide whether or not a person will be forgiven. Even if our sins are as large as a mountain, he will forgive them as long as we ask for forgiveness with sincerity. As He said: If we turn to Him walking, He will come to us running.

You have mostly responded to my previous post by using quotes from the bible, in what I believe is an effort to support your point of view. The problem with that though is as much as I respect the Bible and value my relationship with many good people who are Christians, I don’t believe the Bible is anywhere close to been the Word of God, just as am sure you also don’t believe what I believe in is anywhere even close to the words of God, so how can you use what I don’t believe in to respond to my points? In fact how can even God expect us to believe in what does not make sense and is illogical on the basis of faith? That would be injustice for it is He who created us to think with our minds and not heart. The way to the heart is through the mind; which is why information or knowledge based on logic increases ones faith and information that is illogical, but still accepted through faith is fanaticism. Fanaticism means we are guided by our emotions and desires, instead of God conscience

Can you defend your faith based on reason and invite people to accept salvation through your faith through the same?

Hi Peter and thanks for a very nice reply,

What God transcends is not conscience but thought because If we are able to know or understand God directly through our thoughts than we too would be God or His equal. What we can know, and understand is our relationship with Him.

If we define conscience as that which we willingly choose to serve as our moral compass i.e- science, religion, culture, clergy…, then God or His revelation (be it Quran, Bible..) is our conscience if He is what we have chosen to serve as a guide. Hence what I meant by “do you truly believe in one God” is what you have taken for a conscience or in other words what guides your decisions in every aspect of your life. You can’t tell me it’s the bible or the Quran unless it meets these two criteria:
1.   Does your Holy Book contain complete guidance in terms of behavior and relationships within and beyond your society in terms of business, marriage, the economy, taxation, family…? If no than there is a problem, what do you use for a conscience in these instances? Please don’t tell me right and wrong are your guide because nothing can be more subjective than right and wrong. The guidance must be just and universal so that it can serve as a guide to all people regardless of culture, color, tribe, nation…
2.   Is your holy book the direct word of God, conveyed and written as was intended? Only the direct and unimpeded word of God can fulfill the above mentioned point, otherwise customs, traditions, science, desires, emotions, and clergy begin to fill the gap and thus become our conscience, leading us astray.

As I mentioned earlier we cannot know God directly but we can understand our relationship with Him. From this relationship we derive certain attributes of God which define this relationship. One of Gods attributes is that He is The Just.  He is Just in His relationship with us which is why when Lucifer or Satan stated that he would mislead the sons of Adam God responded by saying he can only misguide the person who through choice decides to follow him; God denied him any power over people because that would not be just. 
I can go on and on but the point I am trying to make is that the whole concept of sin and atonement as you stated does not fit in with the attributes of a Just and ABLE God.  Generally speaking sin is not evil and neither is it a flaw in our creation.  Sin is a necessary part of our existence which is why God provided us with forgiveness. It is only through our mistakes that we realize and learn and pass this information on to the next generation allowing us to socially evolve and advance as a species. Sins are nothing but mistakes and forgiveness is to realize and learn from these mistakes so that you don’t repeat them. I am not calling Universal morals such as murder, rape, stealing… mistakes, no, these are extremes of sin. For example Anger may be good because it can motivate us to do that which is good, but rage or extreme anger may be evil because it can take over our senses and cause us to harm others.
God is One, The Just without a beginning and end. I agree with you that we can never earn heaven on our merit but by the grace of God. This however does not mean you don’t put effort into doing Good; of course this goes against logic. People must place effort into avoiding the extremes of sin as well as mistakes which may lead to harming others as well as themselves. How do you than measure this effort? This question Pete is I think where our two religions differ.
Correct me if I am wrong but yours claims this is measured by ones level of faith and acceptance that Jesus (Peace upon Him) died for your sins. While mine insists it is measured through ones faith and effort in abiding Gods law.

God conscience is taking God for a conscience and living your life in line with the sentence there is no deity except God which is essentially saying that I take full responsibility for my behavior and I understand that I am accountable to no one except God. It is also declaring that no creation on this earth living or non living, in the past, present, or future be it our desire, emotions, clergy, culture or conscience, has a right to control, force us or relieve us of this responsibility.

So can you honestly say you have God conscience? Or have you taken others for a conscience? If yes than that is idolatry.