Ques ; Is There A Difference Between Islam And Christianity

[Ezraarah]

Today in the Western world we have what appears to be two different religions in conflict with each other one being Christianity and The other Islam . The similarities OutWeight the differences , HowEver , The Ignorance of theClergy arekeeping these two Faith from Uniting what this E mail will try to prove is how in actuality there is No Conflict Or Difference between The Christian and the Muslims other than what is Established by Egotistical leadership for Financial Gain And Political Control ...
Quies; Is there a difference between Islam and Christianity ?
There is no difference , If You really go back to the basisof each Religion You will find that there are More Similarities than Differences And the Difference between Islam and christianity only stem from Controversy Concerning The personality of Jesus and Muhammad after their deaths, < Which Are Man - Made , And Keep The Followers Of These Two Religions Apart . > Religious leaders arethe ones who focus on these minor Discrepancies which tend to OverSthadow the many Similarities between them in order to keep their Personal Followers Under Their Personal Control . If the leader of religion didn't Enslave their follower they wouldn't be able to use them as Terrorists and murderers < Sheik Omar Abdel - Rahman - Islamic Faith His followers are behind multiple Assassinations and Terrorist acts ;....Christian and Muslims both believe in Some almighty and supreme being that exist andrule over all things . < They Both Believe In Jesus Many Miracles And That He Is The Word, They Both Acknowledge That Jesus Is The Promised Messiah , And They Both Agree About Jesus Ascension And His Second Advent And Resurrection < John 11 ; 5 ..Koran 19 ; 33 > It Only Appears that Christianity and Islam have difference because the Christian Don't Want To Adhere To Certain Laws That ArePracticed By Muslims And The Muslims Refuse To Acknowledge Law Adhere to By The Christian , Which Are Found In Both The Koran And The Bible . So the muslims take theeasy way out and say The entrie Bible Has Been Tampered With Except for the verse that they wish to use To Support Their Claim . One Of The Reasons The muslims say the entire bible is Tampered with is based around the personality of Jesus . ( 1 ) Acknowledging The Crucifixion , ( 2 ) The Trinity , ( 3 ) Jesus Divinity , ( 4 ) Jesus SonShip , And ( 5 ) Jesus Being God .
Does it say in the koran the Bible has been Tamperd with ?
Yes , but it states that only a portion of the Bible has been tampered with . Thispart of the Bible isonly from the Torah which is the Five Books Of Moses Only and pertains to the jews and the laws that they follow as stated in Koran 4 ; 46 and I Quote Of The Jews There Are Those Who Displace Words From Their ( Right ) Places AndSay '' We Hear And We Obey And Hear ,May You Not Hear '' And Ra;ina with a twist of their Tongues And A Slander To Faith . The muslims are well aware of the Torah , which they call in Koran 3 ; 3 At Tawraat < arabic ;.... And the muslims know that it is only the first five books of the
old testament . Don't let them play dumb when you question them because muslims are masters of evasion and will continue to pretend that they believe all 66 books of the Bible are Adulterated when they know koran 4 ; 46 . only speak of the jews tampering with their book The Torah , The Torah , which the muslims translate in Korah 5 ; 43 - 46 As At Tawraat An Arabic form of the Hebrew word Taurah as I said Earlier consist of only five books , namely 1 . Genesisa , 2 . Exodus . 3 . Leviticus , 4 . Numbers , 5 . Deuteronomy , In modern times the Torah isknown as '' The Pentateuch < Greek ( Penta ) Five -
( Teuch ) Books ; A Greek Word That Literally Means '' Five Books '' The Five Books Are Described As Such ;
( 1 ) . Genesis means; Birth or Origin - In Hebrew it is called Barashith meaning '' In The Beginning '' Which consist of 50 chapter . Genesis is the only account existing of The creation of the world and the events which occured between the first Man , Adam of the people of that family line , meaning from Adam down to his descendants . However , Genesis was taken from Ancient Cuneiform Tablets ;
1 . The Atra Hasis , 2 , The Enuma Elish , 3 . The Gilgamesh Epics
And Many others That Pre - Date The Book Of Genesis By Many Thousands Of Years ,
( 2 ) . Exodus mean Exit ; Departure ; Going Out in Hebrewit is called Shimuth < Aramic .. Andmeans '' These Are The Names '' which consists of 40 chapters . . Exodus is the Continuation of the Record Genealogy of The ( Mortal ) man .
( 3 ) Leviticus means '' The Law Of The Priest Or TheLaw Of Sacrifice '' In Hebrew it is called Wayiqra and means '' And He Called '' Which consists of 27 chapters , Leviticus is the account of the ceremonies to be followed to The Judaic Law ;
( 4 ) Numbers means '' In The Wilderness '' In Hebrewit is called Bimdbar < Aramic Andconsists of 36 chapters Numbers is dedicated to the Numbering ( or census ) of the tribe of Israel whilet they were in the wilderness
( 5 ) Deuteronomy means '' A Second Law '' Restatement Of The Law '' in Hebrew it is called Dibarim and means '' These Are The Words '' which consists of 34 chapters Deuteronomy is Actually A Repetition of the Preceding Laws . When the Koran refers to any book of the Bible , It will say which part is referring to like the Torah 5 Books Of Moses , Zubuwr , Psalm , Koran 3 ; 48 , or Injiyl New testament Koran 3 ;48 , And if Allah is speaking about something other then the above -mentioned Books such as the book of Noah , or Abraham , Then that book is states Specifically by name .
Noah Son Of Lamech And Kamilah ... Isaiah Son Of Amoz And Jedidah ... Abraham Son Of Terah And Nuwna ...
And there is a chapter in the koran that make it clear that there were pages or scrolls , that existed before the Torah , The Zubuwr , or the Injil . And the koran names it in Suwratul Al's the 87th chapter which translates as Chapter Of The Most High '' Which consists of 19 Verse abd the last two verse read like this 18 . And This Is In The Books Of The Barliest ( Revelation ) 19 The Books Of Abraham And Moses . '' The word in this chapter is not the same word used for Scriptures throughout the koran which is '' Kitaab ''It uses the word '' Al Suhuf '' Which tells You that there was aBook Of Abraham . No where does the koran quote the Book Of Abraham . Yet it is mentioned here . So when the korah wants to point out A Book anda person , it does . As I said before , The muslims are the ones who will say the Bible in the Entirety Is tampered with when references are made to any discrepancies . . Let me say this again Allah only refers to the torah being altered by the jews not The Injiyl ( New Testament ) Which only applies to the christians . And since Allah didn't say The Injiyl was Tampered with , and it isnot written in the koran that its tampered with , You must ask the muslims , If Allah Didn't Say It , Where Did It Come from ? Who Put The Thought In The Air That The New Testament , Al Injiyl As The Muslims Call It , Was Tampered With? Andif it'snot , And According To the koran it's not . Then There Is No Difference In The Religion Of The Christians And The Religion Of The Muslims Because Allah Didn't Make The Difference .
Ques ; So I Ask The Question Again ; Is There Anywhere In The Koran Where You Can Find That The New Testament , Called The Injil Has Been Tampered With Or Changed ?
No , nowhere in the koran does it say that the NewTestament is stampered with which themuslims call Al Injiyl in koran 5 ; 46 - 47 , andit is nothing more than a corrupt forn of the greek word Evangel '' Evaggelites And mean a Bring If Good Tidings , To go out and teach '' . So I Say again ; If Allah Doesn't Say That It Was Tampered With , Then BeCareful Of The Muslims That Innovate And Make Claim That Allah Says That A Book Or A Scripture Has Been Tampered With When In Actuality Allah Never Made Such A Claim , Ahmed Deedat is just one on Many who use A numerous amount of verse from theNew Testament to Establish any point made in the koran about jesus, When You Quote from a book your are verifing that it is Authentic not only that , throughout Fifteen chapter of the koran . Jesus is bestowed with numerous Title of honors and Glorifcations ;. And Muslims LQQk at Jesus Christ as a great Prophet of God and love andRespect him as much as they Love and respect Abraham and Moses . But when it come to Muhammad They want Muhammad To Have Jesus Position .
Christianity Islam
Worship Jesus Above All Others Worship The Prophet Muhammad
Above All Others
Name Their Religion After Him NameTheir Religion After Him < Islam >
< Christianity >
Sit Him On The Throne Next Sit Him On The Throne Next
To God To God
Preserve Relics Of The Preserve Relics Of The
Messiah Jesus Prophet Muhammad
Visit Supposed Grave In Visit Grave In Medina Of The
Jersualem Of The Messiah Prophet Muhammad
Jesus
Base Their Religion On The Base Their Religion On The
Of Men ; Matthew , Mark Of Men ; Bukari , Tirmidhi
Luke , And Paul Da'uwd Muslims Etc . Called Hadith =
Word's Of Men And Not Of Allah !!!!
Celebrate His Birthday Celebrate His Birthday
( Christmas Day , December ) ( Mawlad Annabi , Rajab 12th )
( 25th )
So even though the Koran 2 ; 136 says '' Make No Distinction '' When Muslimssays Muhammad name , after it they say '' May Peace And Blessing Be Upon Him '' But After Jesus ' name , they will merely say '' On Him Be Peace '' Openly making the very Distinction that the koran tells them not to in Koran 2 ; 136 And I Quote
Verse 136 . Say ye , we believe in Allah , andthe revelation given to us, andto Abraham , Ismael , Isaac , Jacob , and thetribes, And that was given to Moses and Jesus , andthat was given To ( All ) Prophets from their Lord We Make No Difference Between One Another Of Them And we bow to Allah ( In Islam ) '' And the word Hum <arabic ..Which mean '' Them '' tells You its the prophets they're talking about . Again , these distinctions Are Made By Men . Prophetswere Elevated According to Ranks because they marked a generation of change in thelife of man . < Each Prophet Had Specific Duties According To Their Mission During That Era , Excelling In Rank Has Nothing To Do With Distinction . So Both Jesus And Muhammad AreTo Be Respected For What They Accomplished In Their LifeTimes ;... If the muslims read the NewTestamen they wouldsee that it is A ook attributed to Jesus . By that I mean , First The Gospels ( Matthew, Mark , Luke And John ) Covers his life , then Acts is about his Ministry , and the Letters ( RomansThru 2nd John ) show the development of his doctrine , And Revelation Is About Jesus Coming in the End . Muslimscannot by any means Deny their Dedication to Jesus, because he is Cited more by various Titles than thenumber of time Muhammad is mentioned in the koran for example .
Jesus is mentioned fourteen times as '' Isa Ibn Maryam '' ( Jesus Son Of Mary)
2; 87 ... 4; 171 .... 5 ; 114 .. 61 ; 14 .... 2; 253 ... 5 ; 78 ... 19 ; 34 ... 61 ; 3 ...
3 ; 45 ... 5 ; 110 ... 33 ; 4 ....4 ; 157 ... 5 ; 112 .... 57 ; 27 ....
Seven times as '' Ibn Maryam '' ( Son Of Mary )
5; 17 ( Twice ) 9 ; 31 ... 5 ; 72 ... 23 ; 50 .... 5 ; 75 ...43 ;57 ...
Once as the '' Sign of the hour ''
43 ; 61
Ten times as Rasuwl ( Apostle )
2 ; 87 ... 4 ; 157 ... 57; 27 .... 3 ;53 ... 5; 75 ...4; 171 .... 3 ;53 ... 61 ;6 ... 3; 49 ..
4; 50 ...
Eight timesas '' Isa ''
2 ; 136 .. 3 ;84 ... 43 ;63 ... 3;52 ... 4 ; 163 ...42 ;13 ....3 ; 55 ... 6;85...
Five timein connection with '' Al Ruwh '' ( The Spirit )
2; 87 ... 2 ; 253 .. 5 ; 110 ... 4 ; 171 ... 21 ; 91...
Twice as '' Shahidan '' ( A Witness )
4; 159 ... 5 ; 120 ...
Once as '' Mubaarakan ( Blessed )
19';31
Five times as '' Ayat ' ( Sign )
3 ; 48 ... 19 ;21 ... 21 ;91 ... 23 ; 50 ... 43 ; 63 ...
Once As '' A Rahman '' ( A Mercy )
19 ; 31
Once As '' Qawlal '' ( Statement Of The Truth )
3 ; 45
Once As '' Al Muqarrabiyna ( Those Near To Allah )
3 ; 45
Once As '' Min Al Salihiyna '' ( Of The Righteoius )
3; 45
Twice As '' Mathal '' ( An Example )
43 ; 57 ... 43; 59 ...
Once As '' Mathalan '' ( A Simulator )
3;59
Eight times as '' Al Masih ( The Messiah )
3 ; 45 ... 4 ; 172 .. 9;31 ... 4 ; 157 ... 9; 30 ... 4; 171 ... 5; 75 ( Twice )
Three As '' Abd ( Slave )
4 ; 172 ... 19;30 ... 43 ;59 ...
Once As '' Nabiyan '' ( Prophet )
19 ; 30
Twice As '' Kalimat '' ( Word )
3; 45 ...4; 171 ...
Once As '' Kun Fayakuwn '' ( Be And He Became )
3 ;59
Once As '' Ibnahaa '' ( Her Son )
21 ; 91

[Shaverreturns]

Again, you need to edit your post so that it is at least readable.

I disagree with your main point, which is that there is more similarity between Christianity and Islam than differences. That is not true. There are more differences than similarities.

The main difference is over the view of Jesus.

Jesus is THE Son of God. Jesus is THE Word of God.

Read through John 1 and you will see how amazing it is to claim that Jesus is the Word of God.

Yours,
Shaver

[Asimis]

Dude, Islam is anti-christian..

[Mr. 5020]

Is There A Difference Between Islam And Christianity?

Yes.

[Beef_Cream]

Your post is quite confusing. I think it gave me a headache :argh::tongue:



The fact that there are similarities is no reason for them to join.



Fascism and communism have a number of similarities perhaps they should join.



There are big differences between the two in the central premises.



Islam believes that all is God, You and Me included.



Christianity believes that there is only one God



Mohammed was a profit chosen by God.



Jesus was the son of God



Jesus rose from the dead



Mohammed didn’t



Buddhism has similarities with the two. All three have a moral law. Heck lets all merge and have a big religious party. :cheers:



(PS. I am not slating islam or saying it is wrong. Don’t know enough to do that. I am just pointing out the differences. If anything is wrong. Please correct me :smile:)

[Daawud3rd]

Dude, Islam is anti-christian..All One Has To Look At The Word Christian BackWard And You Have The Word Anti - Christ .....

[Xavier]

All One Has To Look At The Word Christian BackWard And You Have The Word Anti - Christ .....
Naitsirhc...

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmm...

[JCA]

Naitsirhc...

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmm...


Bah.. what do you know you rasta- luci-ferian, you! :lol:


I will say this, if this is an honest attempt to try and lay a bridge between the two religions, then I think it should be welcomed by Christians. We cannot spread the Gospel (or them the Koran for that matter) while we are 'at war'. The more people struggle against trying to find such common ground, the more people show their own agendas, IMHO.

How can we expect people to believe we carry "the good Word" if it rolls off a barbed tongue, or comes from a hardened heart?

While I may not agree with the premise, I can certainly respect the feeling behind it - IF, as I said, it is an honest attempt at some form of reconciliation between camps.. even if it is just ONE person :smile:


Just my thoughts..


Love and Peace

:jca:

[suffer for joy]

Of course Islam and Christianity are similar. The Koran was written in the 7th Century and 90% of the ideas within it are roughshod copyings directly from the Bible and several other religious texts available at that time (including the Talmud, and pagan folklore).

sfj

[suffer for joy]

if this is an honest attempt to try and lay a bridge between the two religions, then I think it should be welcomed by Christians.
Ecumenism with Islam? :eek:

[JCA]

Ecumenism with Islam? :eek:


I think that may be taking it too far, and missing the point I am trying to make :smile:


A bridge is not an immediate acceptance, or even a permanent thing.. But I would say that we need better dialogue with Islam.. after all, looking around at some of the posts from the 'islamic side' around here, it is easy to see how much confusion there really is. Without that 'bridge', Christians will not have a chance to share the Gospel effectively, and so might lose people to 'evil'.

I guess I'm saying I'm not calling for "unity".. just a neutral ground that both can agree to dialect upon..

Love and Peace

:jca:

[dizzle]

dialect upon..

Freudian slip? (look at the OP)

[JCA]

Freudian slip? (look at the OP)


I don't know, was it? :teeth:

Maybe it was put incorrectly.. I'm only just starting to study "Ez".. :blush:

I meant it as:

..just a neutral ground that [where] both can agree to [upon a] dialect (manner or style of expressing oneself in language) ~ in a friendly manner, of course.

Sorry for not being clearer..

Love and Peace

:jca:

[Cephas]

I think that may be taking it too far, and missing the point I am trying to make :smile:


A bridge is not an immediate acceptance, or even a permanent thing.. But I would say that we need better dialogue with Islam.. after all, looking around at some of the posts from the 'islamic side' around here, it is easy to see how much confusion there really is. Without that 'bridge', Christians will not have a chance to share the Gospel effectively, and so might lose people to 'evil'.

I guess I'm saying I'm not calling for "unity".. just a neutral ground that both can agree to dialect upon..

Love and Peace

:jca:JCA, ask the Muslim nations to do some actual reciprocating before we reciprocate ourselves (I believe this is what you mean by "dialoging."). The cold, hard truth is that in many Muslim countries evangelism is punishable by death (for citizens) or deportation (for outsiders). Even in the more "liberal" countries, non-Muslims face threats of physical persecution by Muslims, and some atrocities are overlooked by the government.

On the other hand, the Western world prides itself, sometimes inordinately, on its freedom of religion. Many "Religious" Western countries are more ceremonial than anything, and the spread of strict religious adherence is more heterogeneous than homogeneous. While there are 'hate crimes' against Muslims in America, the media and police are very quick to denounce such crimes, and even go one step further in a pathetically obsequient manner verbally flagellating themselves and groveliing to the Muslim community and groups like CAIR. Muslims are apologized to and are given free reign to practice their religion. Anyone who criticizes Muslims or actions protecting Muslims are soundly denounced as bigots in what I like to call the "PC Taliban."

Nevertheless, TWeb is the closest thing to "neutral ground" I have seen so far. Yet, what I wanted to illustrate was that the playing field is far, far from level--and as the PC crowd try to 'level' it, what they are really doing is digging themselves a grave while the Muslim world stands on the edge, looking down on us. But to be fair, Muslims in the US, under the provisions of our First Amendment, can and do have the opportunity to give a defense for their religion w/o fear of harm. Wish I could say the same about Christians in Saudi Arabia.

I have read and heard about the "People of the Book" concept, and 1.) From what I can see in the news, Muslim nations have acted pretty crappily to the "PotB" (but not Muslims in the West) and 2.) the concept should not be mistaken for "tolerance." Even if the animus against Christians is a form of retaliation against "Western Imperialism," a sort of pseudo-tolerance for Christians and Jews has existed since Muhammad's (pbuh) time. Ask any Muslim about "dhimmi status" or the "Jizya" tax. Basically, it's the Muslim nation's way of coaxing PotB out of their own religion andi into Islam. So much for "no compulsion in religion," huh?

[shunyadragon]

I see as much difference between Judism, Christianity and some of the divisions of Christianity like Mormonism as between Christianity and the Islam.

The assumption that these differences are real assumes that the scriptures are original and true to the teacher and not corrupted.

The human ego is the greatest corrupter of the ideal in all religions.

[WebToaster]

The human ego is the greatest corrupter of the ideal in all religions.
I'm entirely in agreement with your post and this statement in particular.

Which raises another difference between Islam and Christianity. I tried to read the original post, but I too got a headache after a few paragraphs, so from what I could tell it left out a very important difference.

Contemporary Christianity is based upon the Bible, and Islam is based upon the Qur'an. There are HUGE differences between the formation of the Bible and the Qur'an. The books of the current Bible were formed over an indeterminate period between Christ's resurrection and sometimes around the beginning of the 2nd century. Since there were dozens of other books about Christ during this period, there was also an additional period of 300 years or more where the 'canonical' books of the Bible were determined largely by the egos of human men. In Christianity this has become trusted as the egos of men acting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and thus the Holy Spirit must be conjoined into a unity with God and Jesus into a trinity. From this point, the theology of Christianity becomes quite complex.

Whereas, the Qur'an is said to have been dictated entirely by the prophet Muhammed himself. Therefore there is no reason to conscript the Holy Spirit into the Godhead as is necessary in Christianity, and the theology of Islam is quite elegant and simple to understand.

[heaven]

:sigh: I'm entirely in agreement with your post and this statement in particular.

Which raises another difference between Islam and Christianity. I tried to read the original post, but I too got a headache after a few paragraphs, so from what I could tell it left out a very important difference.

Contemporary Christianity is based upon the Bible, and Islam is based upon the Qur'an. There are HUGE differences between the formation of the Bible and the Qur'an. The books of the current Bible were formed over an indeterminate period between Christ's resurrection and sometimes around the beginning of the 2nd century. Since there were dozens of other books about Christ during this period, there was also an additional period of 300 years or more where the 'canonical' books of the Bible were determined largely by the egos of human men. In Christianity this has become trusted as the egos of men acting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and thus the Holy Spirit must be conjoined into a unity with God and Jesus into a trinity. From this point, the theology of Christianity becomes quite complex.

Whereas, the Qur'an is said to have been dictated entirely by the prophet Muhammed himself. Therefore there is no reason to conscript the Holy Spirit into the Godhead as is necessary in Christianity, and the theology of Islam is quite elegant and simple to understand.

Hi All:


Christians worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, YHVH!

The trinitarian concept comes out of the OT

The Messiah is Yeshua

Mary, the Blessed Virgen was Jewish

Yeshua was Jewish

The early church was Jewish or Hebrew

Christianity is a westernized version of Judaism

Yeshua said the law still stands(repudiated by Islam)

Christianity follows the prophets(jewish or hebrew)

Christianity is commanded to keep the feasts (hebrew)

The Apostles were jewish

The liturgical worship of the early and some present churches is Hebrew

Christianity's root is the deposit of faith

To deviate is heresy

Christianity is tolerant of the Moslem faith and all faiths

Islam is a one world religion, one world government organization

Christianity is an organism

Christianity has the Holy Spirit

Christianity has the inspired scriptures

The stakes are high..............Islam opposes Jesus

Jesus said...."If you are not with me, you are against me"

Jesus assures us of eternal salvation

Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil

Jesus came to save the world

Christians are commanded to spread the good news

Christians are commanded to love one another

Christianity cannot be blended, recycled and changed into something else
w/o forsaking Jesus

Jesus is coming soon

It won't be old Buddha sitting on the throne
And it won't be Hari Krishna that's calling us home
And it won't be a charismatic that plays that trumpet tune
So let's all root for Jesus
He's coming back real soon

[Krusader]

The difference between Christianity and Islam is Jesus Christ!

The Quran states over and over that it is an ABOMINATION to say that God has a Son. Further, the Quran denies or distorts many portions of the Old and New Testaments. Mohammed drew upon myths and folk religion, mixed it with a smattering of the Old and New Testaments and created a hybrid-religion that has provoked so much insanity in our times.

Jesus' tomb is empty and Mohammed's tomb holds his body and is located in Medina. Jesus rose from the dead to verify His claim to be God in the flesh, the unique Son of God. Mohammed died - and none of his claims were ever verified by even one miraculous sign.

Who do you believe?

[Shaverreturns]

Webtoaster,

Your last post was indeed interesting. You have stated that the bible and the quran differ in the manner in which they are formed. This is true. The rest of your post is mere speculation with little or no backing what so ever. You misrepresent the biblical formation and the quran too.

You wrote:

"The books of the current Bible were formed over an indeterminate period between Christ's resurrection and sometimes around the beginning of the 2nd century."


My reply -
Well, actually the entire Old Testament was written before 400BC and the reliability and authenticity of the Old Testament is very good due to the finds in the Dead Sea Scrolls, comparing these with the other manuscripts that we have.


You wrote
"Since there were dozens of other books about Christ during this period, there was also an additional period of 300 years or more where the 'canonical' books of the Bible were determined largely by the egos of human men."

My reply -
No, if you do your research correctly you will find that they did not select books, they merely affirmed what were already accepted by the church at the time.

if you are interested in learning about the canon, why don't you check it out here - http://www.answering-islam.org/Bible/index.html#canon


You wrote -
"In Christianity this has become trusted as the egos of men acting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and thus the Holy Spirit must be conjoined into a unity with God and Jesus into a trinity. From this point, the theology of Christianity becomes quite complex."

My reply -
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit has very little to do with the bringing together of the canon. The Holy Spirit and the trinity are found in the bible. I suggest that you read the New testament and you will find so many passages talking about the Holy Spirit. You will also find numerous occasions in the Old testament.


You wrote -
"Whereas, the Qur'an is said to have been dictated entirely by the prophet Muhammed himself. Therefore there is no reason to conscript the Holy Spirit into the Godhead as is necessary in Christianity, and the theology of Islam is quite elegant and simple to understand."

My reply -
I would agree that it is "said" to have been dictated entirely by the prophet but there were many disagreements over a number of verses as to whether they should be in the quran or not. the formation of the quran has many problems because it is not as simple as you suggest.

As to whether the theology of Islam is elegant or not is different. I would argue that it is simple but not necessarily elegant. There are huge problems when it comes to judgement and the holiness of Allah.

If Allah was perfectly holy, then all bad deeds would be punished with death, however Allah can just overlook bad deeds and allow Muslims into paradise.

The God of the bible, the one true living God, is far too holy for that sort of justice. All sins must be punished with death. Either the sinner pays for the sins with death in hell or the sinners' sins are transfered to Jesus dying on the cross.

Either way, the sin is punished by death - either on us or on Jesus. The holiness of God is upheld and sinners can be forgiven - glorious! I would call that elegant.

Yours,
Shaver

[heaven]

Webtoaster,

Your last post was indeed interesting. You have stated that the bible and the quran differ in the manner in which they are formed. This is true. The rest of your post is mere speculation with little or no backing what so ever. You misrepresent the biblical formation and the quran too.

You wrote:

"The books of the current Bible were formed over an indeterminate period between Christ's resurrection and sometimes around the beginning of the 2nd century."


My reply -
Well, actually the entire Old Testament was written before 400BC and the reliability and authenticity of the Old Testament is very good due to the finds in the Dead Sea Scrolls, comparing these with the other manuscripts that we have.


You wrote
"Since there were dozens of other books about Christ during this period, there was also an additional period of 300 years or more where the 'canonical' books of the Bible were determined largely by the egos of human men."

My reply -
No, if you do your research correctly you will find that they did not select books, they merely affirmed what were already accepted by the church at the time.

if you are interested in learning about the canon, why don't you check it out here - http://www.answering-islam.org/Bible/index.html#canon


You wrote -
"In Christianity this has become trusted as the egos of men acting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and thus the Holy Spirit must be conjoined into a unity with God and Jesus into a trinity. From this point, the theology of Christianity becomes quite complex."

My reply -
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit has very little to do with the bringing together of the canon. The Holy Spirit and the trinity are found in the bible. I suggest that you read the New testament and you will find so many passages talking about the Holy Spirit. You will also find numerous occasions in the Old testament.


You wrote -
"Whereas, the Qur'an is said to have been dictated entirely by the prophet Muhammed himself. Therefore there is no reason to conscript the Holy Spirit into the Godhead as is necessary in Christianity, and the theology of Islam is quite elegant and simple to understand."

My reply -
I would agree that it is "said" to have been dictated entirely by the prophet but there were many disagreements over a number of verses as to whether they should be in the quran or not. the formation of the quran has many problems because it is not as simple as you suggest.

As to whether the theology of Islam is elegant or not is different. I would argue that it is simple but not necessarily elegant. There are huge problems when it comes to judgement and the holiness of Allah.

If Allah was perfectly holy, then all bad deeds would be punished with death, however Allah can just overlook bad deeds and allow Muslims into paradise.

The God of the bible, the one true living God, is far too holy for that sort of justice. All sins must be punished with death. Either the sinner pays for the sins with death in hell or the sinners' sins are transfered to Jesus dying on the cross.

Either way, the sin is punished by death - either on us or on Jesus. The holiness of God is upheld and sinners can be forgiven - glorious! I would call that elegant.

Yours,
Shaver
=====================================================

The canon of the New Testament was completed by the Catholic church 400
years after the death of Jesus on the cross. The writings or books included
were determined by the Holy Spirit, since there were many religious writings in
existence and circulated by the church, all of which were not deemed canon.
The Tanakh or jewish scriptures were canonized in 98AD and did not include
the book of Enoch, which is refered to in the NT.

The Quran refers to books in the Tanakh and NT that are not canon, yet
claim that the prophet Mohammed improved upon the scriptures. Since the
scriptures are considered holy books, the question is why moslems do not
read them, making the ascertion that God has no son.:sigh:

[NebuchanezzaEl2]

If I May Add My Point ...I think what the brother is trying to say is, With one would take the time and read The Quraan in the language it was written in which was Arabic ,christian would see there no diffrence .And if the muslims would read the bible in the language that Yashua /Isa teacing was written in which was Aramic ... And not greek nor latin again there wouldn't see any diffrence . ( It is the minister Etc / Imaan Etc And the media which have these groups against one another ... Christian believe Yashua Die for their sin and they feel it was a great thing . But if a muslim give his life for what he believe in .. He his call Evil Etc.. So again it is the teacher and the media of these two groups against each other

[heaven]

The bible is based on truth and prophecy, one change or error would delte the bible.
Various translations bring out subleties and nuances of language only.

The canons of the OT and the NT are based upon religious experience and tradition, all
of which were written down to form the bible. The genealogies of the OT and the NT
coincide and form a continuum up until Jesus. The book of Revelation, the last book
indicates that the entire bible depicts the process of Revelation of Jesus Christ, the
Son of man and the Son of God.

[muslim]

The differences are simply:

*Islam meas: submisssion (i.e. to the will of God) while
Christianity means: Christ followers!! i assume so.

*Islam calls for the worship and adoration of the One and Only One God worthy of worship (we call him Allah, Jews call him Ellohim, Adonai...jehova ..etc...etc).

while

"Present Time" Christianity call for the adoration and worship of THREE (Although they say 3=1), entities The FATHER (which we call Allah), the SON JESUS CHRIST or ('eesa) and the HOLY SPIRIT (which we call Jibreel "Gabriel" ALRUH ALQUDUS).

*In Islam God:have no Equal , does not beget nor he is begotten...

while

In Christianity God is one of THREE and God a BEGOTTEN SON!!

*In Islam Jesus is a PROPHET and MESSENGER in a chain of prophets sent from God to the people of ISRAEL,

while

In Christianity Jesus is the SON of GOD (Far be God from having a Son) sent as a Saviour and a LAMB for sacrifice for the sins of all humanity!!.

*As Muslims we believe in Muhammed as the final messenger and Prophet sent from God (ALLAH) to all humanity .....

while Chrisians disbelieve in him and the signs he've come with althogh he is mentioned in their scriptures................


"Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures) - in the Law and the Gospel - for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); he releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the Light which is sent down with him, it is they who will prosper."

Surah Al-a'raf (7:157)


this all what i can right now... maybe i'll be back soon or after a week , a month or may be longer....

if you want to send me emails send to : musulman1208@hotmail.com or if any one wants to chat on the messenger as well.....


and may the peace of God be upon who follow true guidance...Aameeen

[Xavier]

Greetings Muslim and Welcome to TWeb... :smile:

The differences are simply:

*Islam meas: submisssion (i.e. to the will of God) while
Christianity means: Christ followers!! i assume so.

I said that is a fair description...

*Islam calls for the worship and adoration of the One and Only One God worthy of worship (we call him Allah, Jews call him Ellohim, Adonai...jehova ..etc...etc).

while

"Present Time" Christianity call for the adoration and worship of THREE (Although they say 3=1), entities The FATHER (which we call Allah), the SON JESUS CHRIST or ('eesa) and the HOLY SPIRIT (which we call Jibreel "Gabriel" ALRUH ALQUDUS).

This betrays a drastic misunderstanding of the Christian Doctrine of the Trinity. The Father, Son, and Spirit are a unity of essence. They are ONE being.

*In Islam God:have no Equal , does not beget nor he is begotten...

while

In Christianity God is one of THREE and God a BEGOTTEN SON!!

I would suggest that there is a loaded defintion for "begotten" being used here. The Spirit proceeds from the Son who proceeds from the Father. All are the same, however.

*In Islam Jesus is a PROPHET and MESSENGER in a chain of prophets sent from God to the people of ISRAEL,

while

In Christianity Jesus is the SON of GOD (Far be God from having a Son) sent as a Saviour and a LAMB for sacrifice for the sins of all humanity!!.

Mild note of correction in that Jesus IS GOD (YHWH). The rest is accurate though.

*As Muslims we believe in Muhammed as the final messenger and Prophet sent from God (ALLAH) to all humanity .....

while Chrisians disbelieve in him and the signs he've come with althogh he is mentioned in their scriptures................

That's probably because I don't believe in most of the "signs of Muhammed".

"Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures) - in the Law and the Gospel - for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); he releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the Light which is sent down with him, it is they who will prosper."

Surah Al-a'raf (7:157)

Well, here's a shocker... The Quran is incorrect. That's really okay though, because the Quran is incorrect in many places, especially in its understanding of true Christian tradition.

this all what i can right now... maybe i'll be back soon or after a week , a month or may be longer....

I would hope that it is sooner rather than later.

Yours,
Xavier

[Shaverreturns]

[QUOTE=muslim]The differences are simply:

*Islam meas: submisssion (i.e. to the will of God) while
Christianity means: Christ followers!! i assume so.


I would disagree that there is a difference here. Christianity teaches that it is the will of God to submit to the kingship of Jesus. there is an assumption in the mind of Muslims that Christians do not submit to the will of God. That is incorrect. Christians submit to the will of God by repenting and believing the gospel. The way we submit to God is by submitting to Jesus as our Lord and our God.

The rest of the comparisons that you have made are, as pointed out, based on misconceptions of Christian theology.

Yours sincerely,

Shaver

[Krusader]

I'd like to add that Muslims are submitted to "Allah," who is not the God of the Christians. This Allah, while posing as the Almighty YHWH, has proclaimed that it is an abomination to say that God has a Son. Therefore, whatever spirit was speaking to Mohammed, we can be assured that it was not the Holy Spirit - nor was he in touch with the Angel Gabriel, who appearing to the BVM declared that Jesus was the Son of God!

See the thread, "The Moon and Mohammed."

[heaven]

I'd like to add that Muslims are submitted to "Allah," who is not the God of the Christians. This Allah, while posing as the Almighty YHWH, has proclaimed that it is an abomination to say that God has a Son. Therefore, whatever spirit was speaking to Mohammed, we can be assured that it was not the Holy Spirit - nor was he in touch with the Angel Gabriel, who appearing to the BVM declared that Jesus was the Son of God!

See the thread, "The Moon and Mohammed."

I would fear to be involved with Allah and His claims upon the Scriptures.

REVELATION 22:18

"I warn anyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to
them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.....

[InChristAlways]

I'd like to add that Muslims are submitted to "Allah," who is not the God of the Christians. This Allah, while posing as the Almighty YHWH, has proclaimed that it is an abomination to say that God has a Son. Therefore, whatever spirit was speaking to Mohammed, we can be assured that it was not the Holy Spirit - nor was he in touch with the Angel Gabriel, who appearing to the BVM declared that Jesus was the Son of God!

See the thread, "The Moon and Mohammed."The God of this world is ONE GOD. BTW, the bible only shows ONE HEIR coming through Abraham, that heir being the name of Jesus. The bible is spiritually symbolic and what I feel and believe is the Father is now called by a new name, Jesus and the One prophecied to come to save all mankind. Unfortunately, the jews use a Talmud/misrashes, the muslims use their Koran and christians use the "creeds" and early church writings/endtime books, so my question would be, why not just use the BIBLE? God bless.

genes 15:4 And behold, the word of the LORD [came] to him, saying, "This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir." 5 Then He brought him outside and said, "Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be."

Matthew 1:1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham:

hebrew 1:8"But to the Son He says: 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom."

psalm 2:"Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and you perish in the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him."

Isaiah 9:"For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

The jews of course fail to see this, but if the muslims will read the whole OT through, they will see the wrath and vengeance that would come upon the jews after the messiah is born. The jews became as Esau, Sodom, Egypt etc. This prophecy(and almost all prophecies) is against the rulers in Jerusalem AFTER Jesus is born(the Stone):

Isaiah 28:14 Therefore hear the word of the LORD, you scornful men, Who rule this people who [are] in Jerusalem, 15 Because you have said, "We have made a covenant with death, And with Sheol we are in agreement. When the overflowing scourge passes through, It will not come to us, For we have made lies our refuge, And under falsehood we have hidden ourselves." 16 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation, A tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation; Whoever believes will not act hastily. 17 Also I will make justice the measuring line, And righteousness the plummet; The hail will sweep away the refuge of lies, And the waters will overflow the hiding place.

Jesus came "through" the house of Judah/Judas, but as prophecied, that same house would betray and crucify Him. This also shows the "jews" of the house of Judah losing their HERITAGE and burning in God's anger forever!!!

Jeremiah 17:1 "The sin of Judah written with a pen of iron; With the point of a diamond [it is] engraved On the tablet of their heart, And on the horns of your altars, [i]2 While their children remember Their altars and their wooden images By the green trees on the high hills. 3 O My mountain in the field, I will give as plunder your wealth, all your treasures, [And] your high places of sin within all your borders. 4And you, even yourself, Shall let go of your heritage which I gave you; And I will cause you to serve your enemies In the land which you do not know; For you have kindled a fire in My anger [which] shall burn forever."

[Krusader]

The God of this world is ONE GOD. BTW, the bible only shows ONE HEIR coming through Abraham, that heir being the name of Jesus. The bible is spiritually symbolic and what I feel and believe is the Father is now called by a new name, Jesus and the One prophecied to come to save all mankind. Unfortunately, the jews use a Talmud/misrashes, the muslims use their Koran and christians use the "creeds" and early church writings/endtime books, so my question would be, why not just use the BIBLE? God bless.

genes 15:4 And behold, the word of the LORD [came] to him, saying, "This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir." 5 Then He brought him outside and said, "Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be."

Matthew 1:1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham:

hebrew 1:8"But to the Son He says: 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom."

psalm 2:"Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and you perish in the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him."

Isaiah 9:"For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

The jews of course fail to see this, but if the muslims will read the whole OT through, they will see the wrath and vengeance that would come upon the jews after the messiah is born. The jews became as Esau, Sodom, Egypt etc. This prophecy(and almost all prophecies) is against the rulers in Jerusalem AFTER Jesus is born(the Stone):

Isaiah 28:14 Therefore hear the word of the LORD, you scornful men, Who rule this people who [are] in Jerusalem, 15 Because you have said, "We have made a covenant with death, And with Sheol we are in agreement. When the overflowing scourge passes through, It will not come to us, For we have made lies our refuge, And under falsehood we have hidden ourselves." 16 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation, A tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation; Whoever believes will not act hastily. 17 Also I will make justice the measuring line, And righteousness the plummet; The hail will sweep away the refuge of lies, And the waters will overflow the hiding place.

Jesus came "through" the house of Judah/Judas, but as prophecied, that same house would betray and crucify Him. This also shows the "jews" of the house of Judah losing their HERITAGE and burning in God's anger forever!!!

Jeremiah 17:1 "The sin of Judah written with a pen of iron; With the point of a diamond [it is] engraved On the tablet of their heart, And on the horns of your altars, [i]2 While their children remember Their altars and their wooden images By the green trees on the high hills. 3 O My mountain in the field, I will give as plunder your wealth, all your treasures, [And] your high places of sin within all your borders. 4And you, even yourself, Shall let go of your heritage which I gave you; And I will cause you to serve your enemies In the land which you do not know; For you have kindled a fire in My anger [which] shall burn forever."

"Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit," said Jesus TO his father. Jesus was not the Father.....and to believe He is, is to destroy the subject/object relationship epitomized by Our Lord's word's on the cross.

Jesus is, indeed, God - but you confuse the Persons by making the Son the Father (and ultimately, also the Holy Spirit).

Oneness teaching is a heresy.

[InChristAlways]

"Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit," said Jesus TO his father. Jesus was not the Father.....and to believe He is, is to destroy the subject/object relationship epitomized by Our Lord's word's on the cross.

Jesus is, indeed, God - but you confuse the Persons by making the Son the Father (and ultimately, also the Holy Spirit).

Oneness teaching is a heresy.Hi Crusader. What the heck is the difference, the muslims don't believe Jesus was the Son of God, died and rose from the dead. But evidently they don't believe in revelation either so there again, what difference does it make? Blessings.

Revelation 2:18 " And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write, ' These things says the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet like fine brass:

Who do they think this is, Muhammed?:wink:

Reve 5: 6 And I looked, and behold, in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as though it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent out into all the earth.

[buzsaw]

If I May Add My Point ...I think what the brother is trying to say is, With one would take the time and read The Quraan in the language it was written in which was Arabic ,christian would see there no diffrence .And if the muslims would read the bible in the language that Yashua /Isa teacing was written in which was Aramic ... And not greek nor latin again there wouldn't see any diffrence .

Hi Nebuchanezza. Can you document this by translating exact segments of say 300 words found both in the Bible and the Quran? I'm sure you can't. Would you please specify what you're trying to claim here?

( It is the minister Etc / Imaan Etc And the media which have these groups against one another ... Christian believe Yashua Die for their sin and they feel it was a great thing . But if a muslim give his life for what he believe in .. He his call Evil Etc.. So again it is the teacher and the media of these two groups against each other

There is no similarity here as you claim. Neither Jesus who died for the sins of the world, nor his desciples, all of who were martyred for preaching the saving gospel of Jesus died purposely so as to shed the blood of as many other folks of a different faith or ideology.

Jesus and his desciples never ever killed or physically harmed another. Jesus and his desciples taught to do good to even one's enemies and to suffer rather than take revenge. Mohammed and his close desciples who wrote those early Hadiths and Sunnas taught to fight and kill the infidel and all enemies and to deal severe vengeance on one who harmed them. Mohammed caused the death of many people, including all the adult men in a whole Jewish community, taking the women and children captive for the slave trade or whatever they wanted to do with them.

Biblical fundamentalist Christians who follow the fundamentals of the Bible can freely convert out of Christianity at any time they wish with no reprisal. Not so with Muslims according to Muslim doctrine. To convert out is to become a heretic and is a death warrant in Muslim cultures where Muslim leaders have the majority power to do so.

Yes, the Old Testament of The Bible records a period when Israel, was to destroy and conquer the pagans of Caanan and take it, but it was for that time and purpose alone and for a specific people who worshipped pagan gods which Jehovah, god of the Bible hated and opposed. The Biblical god, Jehovah also treated his own Jewish people as harshly when they themselves turned from him to idols, so he was not partial in his judgement.

The bottom line is which god and which prophet is the true god and which prophet is the true prophet and which book is the true book, the Bible or the Quran. The Bible came first and the scores of remarkable fulfilled prophecies attest to it's supernatural origin as it's human writers were inspired by the spirit of the Biblical god, Jehovah. This, the Quran does not have.

Lastly, the god whose gramatically proper name is Allah, meaning "god" has a different meaning of the Biblical god, Jehovah/Yaweh/YHWH, whose name means, "the existing one" or "the I am." The Biblical god, Jehovah's gramatically proper name is not found in the Quran, nor is Mohammed's Quranish god Allah's gramatically proper name, Allah found in the Bible. I say "gramatically proper" meaning what we would consider a "sirname" or proper name, as opposed to the generic use of the word. I believe the word allah (not capitalized) could be used in a non-gramatically proper generic way to denote any god, such as the Hebrew word elohim/el can be in the Bible, but not sure about that. Neither elohim or lord are the Biblical god, Jehovah's name, but descriptive terms for Jehovah. Yes they are capitalized in most translations, but, Imo, needen't be to be grammatically correct in the English language.

Jehovah, god of the Bible is the true god and Jesus, the christ of the Bible, prophesied in the OT and revealed in the NT is his begotten/born of him, son, prophet and messiah/christ/savior, (edited to add) contrary to the denial of this in the prophet Muhammed's Quran!! :smile:

[shunyadragon]

Webtoaster,

Your last post was indeed interesting. You have stated that the bible and the quran differ in the manner in which they are formed. This is true. The rest of your post is mere speculation with little or no backing what so ever. You misrepresent the biblical formation and the quran too.

Ancient religions in general are highly subjective, and a great deal of speculation with little or no backing what so ever increases the older a religion gets. There are so many worldviews today on scripture that makes misrepresentation simply an assertion made against those that believe differently.

You wrote:

"The books of the current Bible were formed over an indeterminate period between Christ's resurrection and sometimes around the beginning of the 2nd century."


My reply -
Well, actually the entire Old Testament was written before 400BC and the reliability and authenticity of the Old Testament is very good due to the finds in the Dead Sea Scrolls, comparing these with the other manuscripts that we have.

Except for a scant few scrapes, we do not have anything older than the the dead sea scrolls for the OT. The claim that the OT was written about 400 BC is okay but considering the claims of the documents that is not old nor does it support the reliability and authenticity of the OT. Other ancient documents like the Babylonian and Egyptian works are much older and better documented concerning the same regions and periods of history.


You wrote
"Since there were dozens of other books about Christ during this period, there was also an additional period of 300 years or more where the 'canonical' books of the Bible were determined largely by the egos of human men."

My reply -
No, if you do your research correctly you will find that they did not select books, they merely affirmed what were already accepted by the church at the time.

At what time? There is nothing like the gospels or references to them in their present form before the 3rd century, and only scrapes of anything and weak references at best before the 2nd century. Absolutely nothing before ~50 AD. The bottom line is the Romans determined what was Canon quite late.

Research done with a less bised and selective eye would produce a significantly different result.

You wrote -
"In Christianity this has become trusted as the egos of men acting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and thus the Holy Spirit must be conjoined into a unity with God and Jesus into a trinity. From this point, the theology of Christianity becomes quite complex."

My reply -
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit has very little to do with the bringing together of the canon. The Holy Spirit and the trinity are found in the bible. I suggest that you read the New testament and you will find so many passages talking about the Holy Spirit. You will also find numerous occasions in the Old testament.

The trinity is basically a NT concept supported mostly by the letters. The references referred to in the OT are highly speculative and not supported by Jewish Hebrew scholars with an excellent knowledge and tradition of scripture.


You wrote -
"Whereas, the Qur'an is said to have been dictated entirely by the prophet Muhammed himself. Therefore there is no reason to conscript the Holy Spirit into the Godhead as is necessary in Christianity, and the theology of Islam is quite elegant and simple to understand."

My reply -
I would agree that it is "said" to have been dictated entirely by the prophet but there were many disagreements over a number of verses as to whether they should be in the quran or not. the formation of the quran has many problems because it is not as simple as you suggest.

From the objective point of view I will agree with you to a certain extent. All ancient scripture has many problems and disagreements that make an accurate objective interpretation that would be acceptable to all. But, unfortunately the older a religion is, the more problems and subjective the conclusions are concerning differences in interpretation. Islam is basically more united over many basic issues of theology that Christianity, but they share divisions and violent riffs over many issues.

As to whether the theology of Islam is elegant or not is different. I would argue that it is simple but not necessarily elegant. There are huge problems when it comes to judgement and the holiness of Allah.

The problems you see does not involve eloquence, they relate to a basic disagreement in theology. Eloquence implies a simplcity, in this way the God of Islam and Judaism, which they are very much in agreement, are simpler and more eloquent than the trinitarian traditional Christian belief.

If Allah was perfectly holy, then all bad deeds would be punished with death, however Allah can just overlook bad deeds and allow Muslims into paradise.

It is a good thing you are not God. Judaism and Islam share many attributes concerning Divine Law and the nature of obediance and judgement concerning the relationship between God and humans. Your view as stated here is a bit bizzare.

The God of the bible, the one true living God, is far too holy for that sort of justice. All sins must be punished with death. Either the sinner pays for the sins with death in hell or the sinners' sins are transfered to Jesus dying on the cross.

Either way, the sin is punished by death - either on us or on Jesus. The holiness of God is upheld and sinners can be forgiven - glorious! I would call that elegant.

Yours,
Shaver

There is nothing Biblical about the catch all phrase 'all sins must be punished by death'. This belief is only eloquent in its brutal lack of compassion for sinful faliability of human nature. Since God created the nature and situation humanity must endure, I doubt Gods judgement is as brutal and final as portayed by you.

When taken as a whole the Bible says there are consequences for willful disobediance of God, but those consequences do not always involve death..

[Krusader]

But the Bible states that "the wages of sin is death." It is the obvious outcome of sin. However, since God paid the price of sin by the Incarnation and death of the Second Person of the Trinity, it follows that God is LOVE!

[fleur-de-lis]

Correct me if I am wrong: Followers of Islam believe that Jesus did not die on the cross.
Isn't that itself a huge difference?

[Bible Defender]

I got a difference or two.

One is that they deny Jesus as God, the Christ. They do indeed deny the crucifixion.

Second, Biblical Christianity is a faith of a loving God. Islam is a religion of bloodshed and terror. One is a faith spread by dialogue, the other was spread by the sword.

Biblical Christianity is a faith of peace, not so with Islam.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is a cause and effect going on with terror attacks and Islam. That is not to say that all muslims are terrorists or want bloodshed. However, they are peaceful, not because of Islam, but in spite of it.

The muslim can indeed point to passages in the Quran for their acts of horror. But I don't know of one passage where Jesus said to do such things.

In Christianity, you can have dialogue with God, in Islam, you are the slave, so shut up and do what I say.

In Christianity, you can be sure of your slavation because of God's act of Love and Mercy. In Islam, the only assurance of your entrance into paradise is to die in the cause of Allah. (Sura 4:74 and 9:111)

Just my thoughts.

[Harfelugan]

Research done with a less bised and selective eye would produce a significantly different result.
[[[This is the same reply the opposing viewpoint makes to you and both sides present their experts to discredit the others experts . Slinging mud back and forth in a never ending batle of futility going nowhere. I can't take either side of this argument seriously any longer .Bais is the only way that either argument can be accepted .The proof of that is found in the arguments of both sides and refusal of either side to make any semblance of comprimise. ]]]


The trinity is basically a NT concept supported mostly by the letters. The references referred to in the OT are highly speculative and not supported by Jewish Hebrew scholars with an excellent knowledge and tradition of scripture.

[[[[This is true however Jewish Hebrew scholars supporting it or not is like sending Christian Historian or Christian archeologists out to date and give historical accuracy to the N.T. ]]]]




There is nothing Biblical about the catch all phrase 'all sins must be punished by death'. This belief is only eloquent in its brutal lack of compassion for sinful faliability of human nature. Since God created the nature and situation humanity must endure, I doubt Gods judgement is as brutal and final as portayed by you.

When taken as a whole the Bible says there are consequences for willful disobediance of God, but those consequences do not always involve death..[/QUOTE]
[[[[[Rom.6:15-23 for context . The wages of sin is death, the short version. There is no brutal lack of compassion for sinful falability of human nature in these verses , instead we see great compassion on God's part . This context is what the Bible as a whole says .]]]] As to the original post any compatability of the two faiths would be moot because major tenats of both faiths whould have to be comprimised . Neither is willing to do this so the best we can hope for is that all parties practice what they preach and try not to kill each other in their fanaticism before we lose our ability to practice our faith openly . I think the world is about out of patience with our fanaticisms.

[Meh_Gerbil]

Here is a comparison chart I made up before I converted to Christianity. I had carefully considered both Christianity and Islam, and decided to go with the one that passed a simple comparison test:



Doctrine..............................Islam..........Christianity
Montheism...............................Yes...............Yes
Abrahamic...............................Yes...............Yes
Moral Tenents...........................Yes...............Yes
Afterlife...............................Yes...............Yes
Virgins for murder/suicide...............70...............140


As you can see, the advantage is clearly with Christianity.

[Thomas2003]

Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of Jehovah-God, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Mohammed is not His prophet. Rather, Mohammed is the prophet of Allah, whom Jehovah-God identifies as the "serpent" or "satan," the God of Pharaoah, of Molech, of Caesar and he works the unprofitable works of darkness. Mohammed's religion is a political religion, it's religious precisely because it is political to the core - just as that of Egypt, of Babylon and of Rome.

There is no unity between these two religions, nor can there be peace between them, God has predestinated the followers of Christ to eternal life and the followers of Mohammed to eternal damnation.

You've already lost, you need to defect this political order and abandon the false prophet Mohammed.

[Krusader]

Correct me if I am wrong: Followers of Islam believe that Jesus did not die on the cross.
Isn't that itself a huge difference?

Absolutely right. The Quran teaches that Jesus only appeared to die on the cross, but another really died in his place - possibly Judas. The Quranic Jesus is an imposter. Muslims teach that when the Quranic Jesus comes again he will break the cross (obviosuly, this is not the Christian Jesus).

[bhukkadakota]

Here is a comparison chart I made up before I converted to Christianity. I had carefully considered both Christianity and Islam, and decided to go with the one that passed a simple comparison test:




As you can see, the advantage is clearly with Christianity.

Hahaha, thats funny. Keep up the good work.