How does Muhammad compare with Jesus Christ?

[Mikhail]

Hi Mikhail,

..... Your hypocrisy disgusts me.

What are you babbling about? I do not have a double standard, and we are not comparing King david with Muhammad, and it is JESUS that we are comparing, and the Bible in contrast to the Qur'an.

Violence in the Bible is specific and for a specific length of time, such as War(s) and battles of survival for the ancient Hebew tribes of 4,000 - 3,000 years ago. (Or, to destroy vile and evil peoples with forms of the plague that threatened all of mankind. (e.g. Numbers 31)

Now, let us stay on topic, and shall we compare, say, a brief overview of Mattew 5 with the the violent commands in the Qur'an?

Most Muslims are exceptionally gracious and peace-loving people. And Islam has many elements of peacefulness in it. However, anyone who wants to commit violence has perfect justification for doing so from the Quran. While violence in the Quran is sometimes for self-defense; at other times it is open-ended.

Many passages in the Quran exhort Muslims to hate or kill or terrorize infidels (non-Muslims) wherever they find them. See Suras 2:190-193, 2:216, 2:244, 3:56, 3:151, 4:56, 4:74, 4:76, 4:89, 4:91, 4:95, 4:104, 5:51, 5:32-38, 7:96-99, 8:12-14, 8:39, 8:60, 8:65, 9:5, 9:14, 9:23-30, 9:38-41, 9:111, 9:123, 22:18-22, 25:52, 47:4, 47:35, 48:16, 48:29, 61:4, and 66:8-10. (Note: English translators of the Quran sometimes try to soften the true Arabic meaning of some of these passages. For example, to "fight" really means to kill in Arabic.)

faithfacts.org

[bartdanr]

Hello Again, Mikhail,

What are you babbling about? I do not have a double standard, and we are not comparing King david with Muhammad, and it is JESUS that we are comparing, and the Bible in contrast to the Qur'an.

Sorry; in the heat of the moment, I used the word "disgust". That was inappropriate. Please forgive me.

As you will note, I've changed my faith statement. I consider myself Christian now. However, I still think--actually, even more so--that honesty to both our faith and others is vital.

You say that the comparison between Mohammad and Jesus should be remembered, not the comparison between Mohammad and David. I agree. However, if you are a Trinitarian Christian, you must attribute the actions of God, as a whole, to the character of Jesus.

There is no disagreement within the Trinity. When the Father ordered the killing of the Canaanites, the killing of the Amalekite babies, stoning of adulterers, stoning of apostates and stoning of rebellious children, the Son was there. If Christ's preexistence is true, you cannot "absolve" the historical Jesus of Nazarath from the Old Testament. In the wilderness, Christ was there (1 Cor 10:4).

Now, we can debate on the morality of these actions. If you choose to claim the Old Testament was a culturally-produced work that does not truly reflect God's nature, that is your choice. But that is not orthodox Christianity. Orthodox Christianity has always held that the Old Testament accurately tells of God's actions and commands.

Violence in the Bible is specific and for a specific length of time, such as War(s) and battles of survival for the ancient Hebew tribes of 4,000 - 3,000 years ago. (Or, to destroy vile and evil peoples with forms of the plague that threatened all of mankind. (e.g. Numbers 31)

Exactly, I agree. Sadly, the church has often ignored this, and the world has been saddled with violence done in the name of the God of the Bible for centuries.

Now, let us stay on topic, and shall we compare, say, a brief overview of Mattew 5 with the the violent commands in the Qur'an?

Most Muslims are exceptionally gracious and peace-loving people. And Islam has many elements of peacefulness in it. However, anyone who wants to commit violence has perfect justification for doing so from the Quran. While violence in the Quran is sometimes for self-defense; at other times it is open-ended.

Many passages in the Quran exhort Muslims to hate or kill or terrorize infidels (non-Muslims) wherever they find them. See Suras 2:190-193, 2:216, 2:244, 3:56, 3:151, 4:56, 4:74, 4:76, 4:89, 4:91, 4:95, 4:104, 5:51, 5:32-38, 7:96-99, 8:12-14, 8:39, 8:60, 8:65, 9:5, 9:14, 9:23-30, 9:38-41, 9:111, 9:123, 22:18-22, 25:52, 47:4, 47:35, 48:16, 48:29, 61:4, and 66:8-10. (Note: English translators of the Quran sometimes try to soften the true Arabic meaning of some of these passages. For example, to "fight" really means to kill in Arabic.)

faithfacts.org

While I believe that you are taking much of those suras out of context, let's assume for the moment that you are correct. Let's say that in Islam, God commands his followers to kill unbelievers. Is this truly much different than God's commands in the Old Testament?

Now, you may quickly add "but the Old Testament commands were for a specific time and place, and not for all time", as you said above. However, that does not change the fact that it is perfectly in the character of the Abrahamic God to order his followers to kill others--and if one accepts the Bible, it's even perfectly within his character to order the killing of individuals we normally would consider "innocent"--e.g., babies and small children. Furthermore, if Jesus is YHWH incarnate, you cannot say his character can be separated from this biblical teaching.

Now, are the commands of God given in the New Testament "nicer" (in our modern western liberal 'enlightened' societies) than those of the Old Testament or Quran? Perhaps--but that's not our call to make. Unless you're willing to judge the morality of God's actions in the Old Testament, then saying that the Quran's commands are "immoral" without saying the same thing of the God of the Bible (and hence the person of Jesus Christ), then I suggest our criticism of Islam should focus on other issues. At most, we can can say the Quran's commands to kill infidels is reflective of an Old Testament viewpoint and not under the current dispensation. Trying to ignite passionate hatred for Islam on the basis of alleged commands to kill in the Quran is ultimately a case of tossing boulders in a glass house. God has before ordered killing whole races, apostates, adulterers, rebellious children and Sabbath-breakers. Islam holds (in some cases) that these rules still apply today. The Christian (usually) holds that they don't. Islam isn't "immoral" in this level; it's just out-of-date.

Of course, all of these concerns, in my opinion, are only a small subset of the problem of evil. If we accept the sovereignty of God, then all of what we might call "evil" in this world ultimately is in God's hands. And since both Islam and most forms of Christianity teach an eternal hell of torment and suffering for unbelievers, is killing others really all that big in commparison? I'm being somewhat facisious, of course; but it seems these lines of argument--evident in the OP--are barking up the wrong tree.

What the real, undeniable difference between Islam and orthodox Christianity is this: what think ye of Christ? Either he is a human messenger of God or he is God incarnate. And your eternal fate rests upon your answer to this question, according to both Islam and Christianity.

Any way, I'm rambling. Sorry for being long-winded.

[shunyadragon]

What are you babbling about? I do not have a double standard, and we are not comparing King david with Muhammad, and it is JESUS that we are comparing, and the Bible in contrast to the Qur'an.

Violence in the Bible is specific and for a specific length of time, such as War(s) and battles of survival for the ancient Hebew tribes of 4,000 - 3,000 years ago. (Or, to destroy vile and evil peoples with forms of the plague that threatened all of mankind. (e.g. Numbers 31)

Now, let us stay on topic, and shall we compare, say, a brief overview of Mattew 5 with the the violent commands in the Qur'an?

Most Muslims are exceptionally gracious and peace-loving people. And Islam has many elements of peacefulness in it. However, anyone who wants to commit violence has perfect justification for doing so from the Quran. While violence in the Quran is sometimes for self-defense; at other times it is open-ended.

Many passages in the Quran exhort Muslims to hate or kill or terrorize infidels (non-Muslims) wherever they find them. See Suras 2:190-193, 2:216, 2:244, 3:56, 3:151, 4:56, 4:74, 4:76, 4:89, 4:91, 4:95, 4:104, 5:51, 5:32-38, 7:96-99, 8:12-14, 8:39, 8:60, 8:65, 9:5, 9:14, 9:23-30, 9:38-41, 9:111, 9:123, 22:18-22, 25:52, 47:4, 47:35, 48:16, 48:29, 61:4, and 66:8-10. (Note: English translators of the Quran sometimes try to soften the true Arabic meaning of some of these passages. For example, to "fight" really means to kill in Arabic.)

faithfacts.org

I agree in principle with this, but Christianity has the same problem, while most Christians are exceptionally gracious and peace-loving people. But historically those who wanted to commit violence have perfect justification for doing so in the Bible.

This is a significant problem in ancient religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In the scriptures you have two sides the peaceful loving side, and righteous potentially violent side to act against those that do not believe as they do. History and their scripture is a clear witness to this problem.

[barnasha]

So what? Non-Trinitarian Christians make up less than 1% of Christianity. There are also agnostic Christians and atheist Christians, but that is not the nature of traditional Christianity.

you are less than 1% of humanity. so by that logic, there is no way i can take what you say to be right.

[Mikhail]

I agree in principle with this, but Christianity has the same problem, while most Christians are exceptionally gracious and peace-loving people. But historically those who wanted to commit violence have perfect justification for doing so in the Bible.

This is a significant problem in ancient religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In the scriptures you have two sides the peaceful loving side, and righteous potentially violent side to act against those that do not believe as they do. History and their scripture is a clear witness to this problem.

This is what is called: The Fallacy of Force: From - Common Logical Fallacies Made By Muslims

by Robert A. Morey

The Qur'an commands Muslims to wage war against non-Muslims and apostates (Surah 5:33; 9:5, 29).

Some Muslims use a false analogy to answer this argument. They respond by saying, "Well, what about the Crusades? You Christians use violence just like Muslims."

It is logically erroneous to set up a parallel between Muslims killing people in obedience to the Qur'an and Christians killing people in disobedience to the Bible. While the Qur'an commands Jihad, the New Testament forbids it.

[barnasha]

This is what is called: The Fallacy of Force: From - Common Logical Fallacies Made By Muslims

by Robert A. Morey

The Qur'an commands Muslims to wage war against non-Muslims and apostates (Surah 5:33; 9:5, 29).

The Qur'an commands Muslims to not start wars, and to end when the enemy wants to end. (Quran 2:190-193; 60:8-9; 5:87; 8:61; 5:2)

Do we get to pick and choose which verses to look at when making blanket statements about Islam, or do we have to have some kind of obligation towards truth and reason?

[apostoli]

The Qur'an commands Muslims to wage war against non-Muslims and apostates (Surah 5:33; 9:5, 29).

Actually the Surahs you cite are not as generalised as you want...nor do they demand "Muslims to wage war against non-Muslims and apostates"...

Surah 5: Verses 27-31 recounts Cain's murder of Adam, and condemns murder. Surah 5:32 puts a limitation on when killing can occur saying "On that account: We [Allah] ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. " Then Surah 5:33 says "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter."

As is obvious Surah 5:33 is about self defense not aggression.

Surah 9: is about treaties with the Pagan tribes (the text is very specific" verse 5 is the response to those who break the treaty. Verses 1-6: "A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Apostle, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances...Allah and His Apostle dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans...(But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous." Then we encounter the revenge text of verse 5. However notice verse 6 "If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge."

As is obvious when speaking of the pagan tribes Surah 9 is about retailation not instigation.

Surah 5:29 does not have the prophet declaring war on Pagan, Jews, Christians or anyone else. In the previous verses it talks of not putting value in the riches of the world and those who merchandise such, but "strive for Allah". Surah 5:29 reads "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

As you might know "Jizya" is the tax levied on those exempted from military service and under the protection of Muslims (not to mention freedom to practice their own faith), so the "fight" is spiritual not physical. Jihad is an idiomatic expression which basically means "striving in the way of Allah", it can refer to an individual's spiritual struggle to be loyal to Allah, the Muslim society's struggle to be loyal to Allah, or simply a war sanctioned by Allah...

[OneSizeFit]

When the Father ordered the killing of the Canaanites, the killing of the Amalekite babies, stoning of adulterers, stoning of apostates and stoning of rebellious children, the Son was there.

Hmmm...

Love Your Enemies
43 "You have heard that it was said (Torah), "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
44But I say to you (Jesus), love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

People seem to miss the point of Jesus...

[shunyadragon]

The Meek may inherit the Earth, but according to the tail of the Ten Mina in Luke, there will be plenty of terror for those who do not obey.

[R. Hoeppner]

Muhammad is dead
Jesus Christ is alive.

[Bowman]

So how does Muhammad compare to Jesus Christ in History?

According to the authors of the Koran, 'Muhammad' is Jesus Christ.

[Pilgrim]

Why would I post a list of falsehoods?

You are obviously clueless about Jesus Christ, and the New Covenant.

Clearly you are. I am a Christian and a faithful one. But you have to deny the text of the Old Testament and the nature of the triune God (an esseintial tenet of Christian faith) to come to the conclusion you have come to. God did in fact order some very hard to understand and swallow things in the OT. And the God of the Old Testament is one and the same with God the Son of the New. If you are faithful you can not simply ignore the parts that are inconvenient.

[gharfish]

What are you babbling about? I do not have a double standard, and we are not comparing King david with Muhammad, and it is JESUS that we are comparing, and the Bible in contrast to the Qur'an.

Violence in the Bible is specific and for a specific length of time, such as War(s) and battles of survival for the ancient Hebew tribes of 4,000 - 3,000 years ago. (Or, to destroy vile and evil peoples with forms of the plague that threatened all of mankind. (e.g. Numbers 31)

Now, let us stay on topic, and shall we compare, say, a brief overview of Mattew 5 with the the violent commands in the Qur'an?

..........

Pilgrim is right. Pilgrim is right. If he hadn't said this, up there (post 42), I was prepared to. You had avoided this thorny issue, until at last speaking up in this post of your's that I've quoted.

A trinitarian view of God must be upheld. Jesus upheld it!




It's true that Yahweh warring was limited in it's duration and extent then, and it was for a purpose. But it will also resume towards the end of the age. Even if one is an orthodox preterist and doesn't see Yahweh war (along with warfare done simply by the will of man) in the N.T.'s The Revelation and in OT prophetic texts, all Christians must admit that Jesus for being the incarnation of the same being that is the creator God ordered and even helped in some of this awful punishment and violence.

The trinity! .....The Jews called the creator God, the heavenly Father. Jesus, though a person simply for being a human, is the same being who is the creator "Father" God. Therefore, Jesus, is the One who did engage in ordering and aiding the Jews in warfare.

God is indeed violent. He is a spirit and not really a person as we know [what is] a person. He has been and will be a killer. By will be, I mean that He will cause people to perish in the otherworldly hell. Jesus is God, the being who is the creator God, who takes 'the white throne' in The Revelation and He conducts the last judgement.


>

[OneSizeFit]

Pilgrim is right. Pilgrim is right. If he hadn't said this, up there (post 42), I was prepared to. You had avoided this thorny issue, until at last speaking up in this post of your's that I've quoted.

A trinitarian view of God must be upheld. Jesus upheld it!




It's true that Yahweh warring was limited in it's duration and extent then, and it was for a purpose. But it will also resume towards the end of the age. Even if one is an orthodox preterist and doesn't see Yahweh war (along with warfare done simply by the will of man) in the N.T.'s The Revelation and in OT prophetic texts, all Christians must admit that Jesus for being the incarnation of the same being that is the creator God ordered and even helped in some of this awful punishment and violence.

The trinity! .....The Jews called the creator God, the heavenly Father. Jesus, though a person simply for being a human, is the same being who is the creator "Father" God. Therefore, Jesus, is the One who did engage in ordering and aiding the Jews in warfare.

God is indeed violent. He is a spirit and not really a person as we know [what is] a person. He has been and will be a killer. By will be, I mean that He will cause people to perish in the otherworldly hell. Jesus is God, the being who is the creator God, who takes 'the white throne' in The Revelation and He conducts the last judgement.


>

God is violent? sweet, then I can be too, with my wife, with my kids, with mtpy friends and neighbors! or is it do as I say not as I do, pffffffff lame.

[gharfish]

Is this written to inform me of something ? Is it just a general reaction ? Have I somehow given you some new news ? "sweet," you said.

I'll risk getting farther into it, though it's sarcasm that you wrote. You do disagree that our God is violent (you have the faith tag: Christian), or, do you agree that He is and that it's 'lame'...because that'd mean He's a hypocrite? to not free you, in turn, to do harm to your wife, kids, friends and neighbors?



>