Excellent article..
Question:
Missionaries often claim that the canon of the New Testament was not decided by a Council, and that its authors were guided by God. They also claim that since a Council was not needed and that all of Christendom accepted the books, it is a divine proof from God that Christianity is the truth. How do we respond to this?
Answer:
This is factually incorrect. The proto-orthodox Church whose canon of scripture later came to be known as the New Testament, did in fact have two Ecumenical (Unity) Councils regarding the canon of their scripture. The Councils of Carthage in 393 and 397 CE respectively, are historically considered to be when the Church ‘confirmed’ the canon. Most Christians seem to be unaware of these Councils and so make this claim that the canon was not decided by any Council, and so the emergence of their scripture is a divine…
View original post 258 more words
Categories: Islam
Blogging Theology 
Surah 5 (Al Maidah)
Verse 43. But how do they come to you for decision while they have the Taurat (Torah), in which is the (plain) Decision of Allah; yet even after that, they turn away. For they are not (really) believers.
44. Verily, We did send down the Taurat (Torah) [to Musa (Moses)], therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah’s Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged the Jews by the Taurat (Torah) after those Prophets] for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah’s Book, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun (i.e. disbelievers – of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allah’s Laws ).
46. And in their footsteps, We sent ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) , confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun (the pious – see V.2:2).
47. Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fasiqun (the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree) to Allah.
48. And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad ) the Book (this Qur’an) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohayminan (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures) . So judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging away from the truth that has come to you. To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way. If Allah willed, He would have made you one nation, but that (He) may test you in what He has given you; so strive as in a race in good deeds. The return of you (all) is to Allah; then He will inform you about that in which you used to differ.
For the sake of this topic, the most crucial points are verse 47 and 48. Verse 47 is clear that the Quran is talking to present day Christians, i.e. the ones who were living during the time of Muhammad in the 7th century. The NT canon was established centuries before that, and the only “injeel” these Christians had are the same ones which we have in our bibles today. Though there are 4 gospels in the bible, they all have the same unified message, “preaching/spreading the good news about the kingdom of God” which is what the word gospel/injeel stands for. In that sense, they all work as one gospel which for me explains why the Quran only mentions one “injeel”, because it was Jesus’ task to share the gospel which he did.
The crucial point of verse 48 is this sentence here: “To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way. If Allah had willed, He would have made you one nation, but that He may test you in what He has given you”. Here the Quran is saying, Jews have the Torah, Christians have the gospel and Muslims have the Quran, and each group is to follow these books to the best of their ability because if Allah wanted to, He could have made everyone follow the same faith but instead has chosen to test us with what we have. This is linked with verse 43 which affirms that the “plain decision of Allah” is still found in the Torah, and verse 47 which says Christians should judge by what Allah has revealed in the gospel.
So according to the Quran, Judaism and Christianity are still divine truths and proofs from God. If the NT canon was as bad as you say, the Quran would never say that it confirms the injeel but would rather be very explicit about its corrupted nature which is mentioned nowhere in the Quran. Also, if Islam or the Quran came to replace the previous faiths and scriptures that would have happened a long time ago too. That hasn’t happened, nor does the Quran say anywhere that it’s come to replace the previous faith or scriptures.
It’s our responsibility therefore to find ways of meaningful co-existence between the Abrahamic faiths rather than continuing to push them further apart, creating a wider gap of ignorance and hatred.
LikeLike
The Quranic position expressed in 3: 3-4 seems to say that the Injil given to Jesus is certainly to be found in the existing gospels, but is not coterminous with it, yet is still recognised and sanctioned by God. So the truths and commands of the Injil given to Jesus are still known to Christians through ‘that which they had with them’ (2:89). So it’s possible the Quran when referring to the Injil that Christians have before them, includes both the text and the normative tradition around that text insofar as they convey Christ’s original message to his apostles, which was given to him by God.
LikeLike
I agree, thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Marvin,
I consider it to be false equivalency to equate the Injeel with the New Testament. Sure, the proto-orthodox canon was set at that point, and evidently you’ll cite one of the Uncial codices. Where I would strongly disagree is, what do you know about the Jews and Christians in the Hijazi region, as well as in Syro-Arabia?
Which sect of Judaism did those Jews belong to? Which sect did those Christians belong to? What evidence do you have of either of those groups’ canons? The verses of the Qur’an are referring to a specific incident in the case of the Jews. It is referring to the Torah of Ibn Surya, or whatever he had of it, for he was their prime scholar of their region. He agreed with the Prophet salalllaahu ‘alayhi wa salam in his judgment of stoning, thus the Qur’an is not referring to the canon of the Essenes, nor the canon of the Samaritans, nor the canon of the Hasmonaean era Jews. it is referring to the the Torah found with Ibn Surya who was amongst them.
Allah ta ‘ala also mentions to the Christians that they have the law of God with them, which they should adhere to, a Shari’ah. Christians have no law, what is your Shari’ah? Again, this is the problem with false equivalency, these Christians are not proto-orthodox Christians. What canon did they have, and what manuscripts do we have from them? Let me know when you get the answer.
In conclusion, the Qur’an confirms an Injeel given to Jesus ‘alayhi as salaam, which contained a Shari’ah. He did not give him Majmu ul Kutub or Kitab al Muqaddas. He gave him the Injeel, singular. Not plural. This Injeel contained a Shari’ah. The Qur’an is confirming that the nations before us also received a Shari’ah, one entailed in the Torah and the other in the Injeel. The Qur’an does not confirm Judaism, or Christianity, rather it confirms what God previously gave those nations earlier.
Christians need to read the Qur’an as the Qur’an, not in light of the Bible. When they do that, they read into it their histories, their beliefs, their ideas. Projecting your biases upon the text, removes it from its context(s).
Regards,
LikeLike
Ijaz,
I’m aware that there were different sects of Judaism and Christianity in the Hijzai region and the Syro-Arabian region too, that’s nothing new. After the Roman church accepted Christianity as the state religion, they forced out many people who didn’t share their views. Many of these would have settled in the regions around Syria and Arabia. Some Syriac churches in the early history of Christianity had already been using a NT canon made up of the Diatessaron (which a Christian called Tatian created by attempting to unify the stories found in the 4 gospels), the book of Acts and about 15 Pauline epistles. By the 5th century, Syriac Bibles contained at least 22 books found in the standard 27 NT canon, called the Peshitta. So there is your answer to the question “What canon did they have, and what manuscripts do we have from them?”
Also the 4 gospels were spread and known throughout Christian nations, regardless of their sects. So once again: the only “injeel” these Christians had are the same ones which we have in our bibles today. And by Injeel I mean the 4 gospels, not the entire NT.
“Christians have no law, what is your Shari’ah?” The Quran says “Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah has revealed therein” (Surah 5:47). Our law is found in our scriptures. Jesus left his followers with his teaches and commands to follow in the gospels. His followers then also further taught others, whose writings are found in the other NT books, including Paul’s. Besides that, Jesus and his followers were simply continuing a tradition of Jewish law as found in the Hebrew Bible already.
“The verses of the Qur’an are referring to a specific incident in the case of the Jews. It is referring to the Torah of Ibn Surya, or whatever he had of it, for he was their prime scholar of their region… it is referring to the the Torah found with Ibn Surya who was amongst them.”
“The Qur’an is confirming that the nations before us also received a Shari’ah, one entailed in the Torah and the other in the Injeel.”
Thanks, you’ve just revealed why the Quran is therefore the work of a human being rather than from God. If I had a stronger vocabulary, I would better express just how problematic your words are but I don’t so this will do for now: In the first part that I’ve quoted from you, you said the Quran is referring to a specific incident in the case of the Jews. It is referring to the Torah of Ibn Surya according to your understanding. Where does the Quran say it is speaking only about a specific Torah given to a specific Jew by the name of Ibn Surya? If the Quran is only referring to specific Jews and specific Torah’s, then it shows that the author of the Quran had a limited understanding of the wider culture outside of his Syro-Arabian culture, which he would have frequently visited and been acquainted with during his travels as a merchant tradesman. Here I thought the Quran was referring to all Jews and all Christians, but apparently I’m wrong. This isn’t problematic for me, it’s problematic for you since you believe that the Quran holds the only truth and that it never confirms Judaism or Christianity, nor their respective holy books.
In the second part I quoted, you said the Quran confirms that the nations before also received a Shari’ah in the Torah and Injeel. From what I know, the word sharia means something along the lines of “pathway to be followed”. This makes perfect sense with the part in Surah 5:48 that I quoted: “To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way.” Bear in mind that it is written in present tense and clearly says “To each among you”, i.e. the different groups (Jews, Christians, and Muslims) can co-exist with their own respective laws/books. But apparently I’m wrong once again. Based on everything you’ve said, I’m guessing you believe that the “original” Torah and Injeel mysteriously vanished from this Earth. “This Injeel contained a Shari’ah”, so where did it go? And why did God confirm previous texts that no longer existed by the time of His new revelation? It would have at least been helpful if the Quran said something like “This Quran confirms the scriptures that came before it, which no longer exist”, but no it doesn’t say that. Instead the Quran repeatedly says that it confirms the previous scriptures in multiple different passages, and even says that Muhammad can be found in both the Torah and Gospels of the current Jews and Christians (Surah 7:157 – whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them).
It seems here that the one projecting their biases upon the text is you. I’m trying to read the Quran for the Quran but apparently not.
LikeLike
“Christians have no law”.That’s like the most ignorant thing I’ve read here.
Shariah is not even well defined in islam let alone the koran so here’s my question to you.. What is YOUR shariah? (PS don’t get this one wrong, you risk committing blasphemy and having your hands chopped off, good luck)
LikeLike
Mr. Henry
Do not forget about canon. It means the Church Fathers did not agree with other stories of Jesus. So, the NT is not the only stories about Jesus. We have so many including gnostic gospels and some stories of the Bible like the dead sea scrolls, epistle of Banabas, Shepherd Hermas etc. were discovered recently. Some gnostic gospels were discovered recently and prophet Mohammed was accused of copying from it.
If the Quran refers to a scriptures that is with the Jews or Christians, it could be other gospel or story of Jesus that did not find its way into the canon like the gnostic gospels which Christians accuse prophet Mohammed of copying.
There are so many weird things and strange beliefs in the gnostic gospels, why did the Quran not copy those? but instead, the Quran just said Jesus made clay birds and made them live.
It was discovered late and perhaps more can be discovered later. What ever you call it, it could be the injil in the Quran is referring to. Or it could be part of the current NT because there is a longer Mark and a shorter Mark gospel verses etc.
Quran did not hint any thing that NT got wrong like “Son of God” but corrected None that God is not Son to anyone and that disqualify Jesus as being God. If the Quran copied from NT, why is it correcting it?
The Quran corrected Jews and said Jesus is indeed the messiah. If the prophet copied from their scripture as you think, then why is the Quran correcting them(Jews)? Is Quran not right when it corrected their scripture and them(Jews) that Jesus is the messiah?
Ask Jews, they will tell you that the Quran is correct when it corrected the Christians and said God is no Son to anyone and the warning “Do not say 3, desist, it is better for you”, “Say: God is One, Only and Alone”.
Why did the Quran added the conversation that took place between the pharaoh when he was about to drown and the preservation of the body that cannot be found in the Bible?
The Quran seem to be correcting the NT, Torah, Jews, Gnostic gospels and anything contrary to God message and the injil it is talking is for Jesus not John, Mathew, Mark, Luke, Paul etc. It is not talking about the current NT for sure.
Christians could be judged by the current NT, if they take Gods word out of others like the Unitarian Christians who do not believe Jesus is God will be judged by not being polytheists but they will have problem of other things.
Mr. Henry, from the above, the Quran is to correct but not to copy.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Hi Marvin,
I’m afraid you didn’t understand the question, or perhaps you did and found generalizing of a specific question as an appropriate cop-out, I do not. What sect did this group of Jews which came to the Prophet and what sect did this group of Christians belong to? Generalizing by saying the Peshitta was Syriac, therefore it applied to all Syro-Arabian sects is again….a false generalization. So when it comes to the question, you’ve most disastrously failed. Kindly try again, and this time, be specific with citations about the sect and its beliefs.
Again, you also persisted in mentioning that THE Injeel must be your proto-orthodox canon. A cursory reading of the Panarion would quite quickly have you understand that entire sects had their own Gospel traditions. To assume that all of Christianity accepted at least one of or some of the proto-orthodox canon is both naive and irresponsible. It would serve you right to know that under the threat of the sword, by way at least of Justinian the 1st many Syro-Arabian Christians and Jews fled into the inner Arabian region, why would these Christians have fled if they shared your canon, if not for such divergent beliefs as Bockmuehl has documented.
Christianity is not a continuation of the Jewish halacha, it is an abolishing of it. The very point of Christianity is the salvific supremacy of grace over the law, the Shari’ah calls to adherence to it in light of salvation. You cannot both have adherence to it and rejection of it in lieu of grace. Unless of course you do adhere to the salvific mitzvot, which would then put you outside of mainstream Christianity? As for your overly wordy tirade on the limited view of the Qur’anic author regarding the Torah, you made quite an absurd error and drew an equally Christian argument from it. The Qur’an in that instance in referencing a specific incident, why then should that specific incident speak to all of Judaism? That’s a lot like arguing that when the NT mentions false Christians/ hypocrites in Matthew 7, it must be referring to all Christians. Why can’t the Qur’an be referencing a specific incident and a specific person? Why does it have to refer to your brand of Christianity and your sect’s beliefs? Rather, you’ve not demonstrated the limited knowledge of the Qur’an’s author, but rather that of your own.
As for the second path, yes the Qur’an affirms a body of law was sent, that’s the definition of Shari’ah. It does not mean merely to follow something, it’s quite specific in what it refers to follow, as you yourself quoted, “a law and a clear way”. Considering your salvation is not based upon laws as in the Judaic halacha, which entails the mitzvot, you are not only being dishonest, but if I excuse you, it would mean that you don’t even understand Christian soteriology. Apparently, you are wrong again since in your religion, Jesus is alleged to have taught that he was the way, the truth and the life. Salvation was only through him, not through the Judaic halacha. Seems like you’ve just thrown mainstream Christianity out of the window, and Jesus along with it. Who knew you were a perennialist? Have you ever heard of argumentum ex silentio? Great. Bamidbar 21:14, know of it? Why does every copy of it seem to have disappeared from the face of the earth? Epistle to Laodicaea fits the bill as well.
As for why does the Qur’an confirm previous revelations given? Well isn’t that obvious? Ask the people of Banu Taghlib, or Abdullah ibn Salam or Salman the Persian, or any of the hundreds and then thousands of Christians and Jews who en masse accepted Islam on the premise of his Prophethood. The Qur’an came to confirm the truth, and it confirmed the truth that was still amongst them, in whatever form it may have existed at that time. Mind you, the mass form of communication at that time was and remained for several centuries thereafter oral/ aural transmission. Much in the way of the early Christian tradition, both are lost, it however does not mean they never existed and thus it makes sense why the Qur’an confirms those traditions. The Qur’an qualifies what of the Torah and Gospel is with them currently – the Prophet’s description. It’s not an absolute endorsement, it’s actually quite specific. Try to read entire sentences, not the parts you like alone.
Apparently not is the right phrase to use. You’re still assuming Injeel means New Testament, but you’ve yet to qualify that. In fact, when called upon for specifics, you run to false generalizations. Try to be a bit more honest, I think Jesus would have appreciated that.
Regards,
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ijaz,
In my response I clearly wrote “some Syriac churches” so there is no generalisation on my part. And quite frankly it really doesn’t matter which sect of Jews or Christians approached Muhammad. If the author of the Quran is only referring to specific Jews and Christians rather than to all, it shows an ignorance on his part of the wider beliefs of these followers. That would mean the Quran isn’t universal at all, but rather focuses on the beliefs of the people who Muhammad would have been exposed to in his life. I would have thought the Quran was referring to more than just a few Jews or Christians but you put it out there not me.
Actually I didn’t say the Injeel must be the canon, stop injecting words into my mouth. My point was that injeel/gospel stands for “good news” and that the 4 gospels are unified in delivering that message. Also, even if Christian sects had their own gospel traditions, they were not unified or codified but quite flexible. In fact many diverse gospels such as the gospel of Hebrews and Ebionites used the Gospel of Mathew as a basis. These Christians fled because of their beliefs not necessarily their scriptures. For example, the councils involving Arius and Athanasius were about conflicting beliefs of Jesus’ nature yet both would quote from the same gospels to back their claims.
“Christianity is not a continuation of the Jewish halacha, it is an abolishing of it.” Well according to the Quran in Surah 5:46, Christianity is a continuation of Judaism – “And in their footsteps, We sent ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) , confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun”
When you read this passage of the Quran without the filtered opinions of some Islamic commentary you might be reading alongside with, it is clear in its meaning. When the Quran says “Verily, We did send down the Taurat” it’s not talking about the Torah of ibn Surya, at least that’s not what I thought. The only reason you’d assume it’s specific to certain Jews is probably because you’ve read some commentary telling you that that’s the only way to interpret the passage. Also it’s not the same argument as Matthew 7. Jesus clearly says “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21). Therefore it can apply to anyone who is not doing the will of God in heaven, whether they claim to be Christian or not. And I’m not saying that the Quran cannot refer to specific incidents or people, which it clearly does. My point is that in this passage in particular that I quoted from Surah 5:43-48, it is clear from just reading the text without filtered commentary/tafsir that it is talking to Jews and Christians in general, rather than specific ones or their supposedly specific scriptures. Because if that were not the case, what exactly happened to Ibn Surya’s Torah, and how much did it differ from the Torah which other Jews would have been reading? Likewise with the gospel mentioned in verse 47, if it’s just talking to specific Christians in that region, it’s rather strange or inconvenient (or maybe convenient depending on how you look at it) that they just happened to go missing from the face of the Earth.
“Why does it have to refer to your brand of Christianity and your sect’s beliefs?” Clearly you don’t understand what all Christians means, I mentioned nothing about it applying only to my “brand” of Christianity.
Not even in Judaism is salvation dependant on laws. Salvation is based on the grace and mercy of God, if it were simply by our works then no one would be saved as the Hebrew bible is clear “Indeed, there is no one on earth who is righteous, no one who does what is right and never sins.” (Ecclesiastes 7:20). And I don’t care much about mainstream Christianity, I follow what is written in scriptures to the best of my ability. Jesus’ true teachings are not defined by “mainstream Christianity” but rather what he said in the scriptures.
If by perennialist you mean I believe each of the world’s religions contains a single universal truth, then I have no problem with that. Truth can be found anywhere, especially moral truth. Not all religions can be true simultaneously in their beliefs and statements because there are clear contradictions in many places, but at least most of them contain some forms of truth such as in the golden rule. And I’m glad you mentioned Matthew 7 as I explained already from verse 21, which is similar also to Matthew 12:50 – “For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” That can be applied to anyone, even non-Christians can do the will of God without knowing it. Any act of kindness is the will of God, as Jesus explains is the fundamental truth and essence of the entire Hebrew Scriptures: “Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:37-40) and Matthew 7:12 “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
As I explained already, the Quran not only confirms the previous scriptures but also allows Jews and Christians to continue to follow their scriptural traditions. Not just in what I quoted but also other parts of the Quran such as in the same Surah again, verse 68: Say, “O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord.” Even if the last part is talking about the Quran, the verse is still clear that Jews and Christians should continue to uphold the law in their scriptures.
Anyway it’s clear to me that you just wish to remain stubborn and employ defence mechanisms to feel better about your beliefs. Nowhere did I equate Injeel with New Testament, you haven’t been reading my responses properly and you call me dishonest. We could simply have left this at Paul’s response to me but no some people’s egos are too great, you must show just how right you are and wrong I am. Well done Ijaz, great way to call Christians.
LikeLike
I don’t want to get caught up in this argument, but I noticed a curious thing:
Marvin writes:
‘Not even in Judaism is salvation dependant on laws. Salvation is based on the grace and mercy of God, if it were simply by our works then no one would be saved as the Hebrew bible is clear “Indeed, there is no one on earth who is righteous, no one who does what is right and never sins.” (Ecclesiastes 7:20). ‘
Luke 1 tells us the following (and there are many other similar examples in the Jewish Scriptures):
‘In the time of Herod king of Judea there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah; his wife Elizabeth was also a descendant of Aaron. 6 Both of them were righteous in the sight of God, observing all the Lord’s commands and decrees blamelessly.’
But the Bible is in reality a library of books with diverse and occasionally contradictory teachings.
—————–
Marvin writes:
‘Not even in Judaism is salvation dependant on laws.” I think this is broadly correct, but see this teaching of Jesus:
Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”
“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”
Matthew 19
LikeLike
I think Ecclesiastes 7:20 is talking about “righteous” in the ultimate sense of the term that only God is truly righteous. It’s saying we can’t be totally righteous because every human being has sinned. Yes you can do good and live a righteous life, but ultimately only God is truly righteous.
This is similar to the passage you’ve quoted from Matthew 19. Jesus says only God is good. Does that mean there aren’t any good people in this world? It’s getting to the deeper meanings of those words, to show the difference in holiness and morality between God and us human beings.
Yet for people to be righteous in God’s sight such as Zechariah and his wife, and others such as Job, that means they are leading a life that is pleasing in God’s sight i.e diligently following His commandments.
And yes it’s vital to keep the commandments, yet we must always remain humble and not boast about our goodness or how righteous we are compared to someone else. That leads to pride and would just completely reverse the whole process. We should keep the commandments as Jesus said but not use them as some sort of points chart to see how close we are to getting into heaven. That’s why Paul says in Ephesians 2:8-9 “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God–not by works, so that no one can boast.”
Jesus gives an example of what happens when people believe they are self-righteous, Luke 18:9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fasttwice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’
13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breastand said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’
14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”
We should keep the commandments to enter life, but not see our works as the only means to the end because we should humble ourselves and know that it is by God’s grace and mercy that we are truly saved.
LikeLike
a righteous person in the Bible is not someone who has never sinned but one who keeps repenting and coming back to obedience to God.
Given that Zechariah and his wife are righteous and pleasing to God, then they are not condemned to hell, nor do they needed ‘saving’ by a human sacrifice as Christians believe. You can’t have it both ways.
You say “And yes it’s vital to keep the commandments” yet Christians follow virtually none of the 613 commandments that Jesus (as a Torah-observant Jew) had in mind in Matthew 19.
There is something very strange going on here.
LikeLike
Mr. Henry
You said;
We should keep the commandments to enter life, but not see our works as the only means to the end because we should humble ourselves and know that it is by God’s grace and mercy that we are truly saved.
I say;
That is what Muslims believe i.e. Gods law must be followed and it is by God’s grace and mercy that we are saved.
Christians do not believe what you said or wrote and I quote above.
Reasons and Why?
Christians believe it is only the blood or Jesus or dying on the cross that will save mankind.
-Dying on the cross or blood sacrifice is not God’s mercy. God’s mercy is God’s mercy but not blood or dying.
-God showed mercy to the people who followed Moses, Abraham, Jacob etc. and at that time Jesus was not crucified yet. Do you have any evidence to show to us God froze His mercy to the people of Abraham etc. until Jesus’s crucifixion?
Some Christians will boast and say they are saved and they knew they are saved and blame Muslims for saying InshaAllah i.e. by God’s grace or mercy. Even though this Christians never visited heaven and have no any prove of that.
-They believed just by believing the death of Jesus to save them, they are saved. Not mercy of God but sacrifice.
Every religion, including Rastafarians, Hindus, Christians, Muslims etc. believed they are saved. But God is the final judge and no one has the right to be the judge except God Himself and as far as one stays on earth he is not free from sin and can not get a ticket to heaven like some Christians erroneously preaching that they have ticket to heaven.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Mr. Henry
Blood or sacrifice is not mercy.
mer·cy
/ˈmərsē/
noun
noun: mercy; plural noun: mercies
1. compassion or forgiveness shown toward someone whom it is within one’s power to punish or harm.
“the boy was screaming and begging for mercy”
synonyms: leniency , clemency , compassion , grace , pity , charity , forgiveness , forbearance , quarter , humanity
2. exclamation
archaic
exclamation: mercy
1. used in expressions of surprise or fear.
““Mercy me!” uttered Mrs. Garfield”
Thanks.
LikeLike
Mr. Henry
sac·ri·fice
/ˈsakrəˌfīs/
noun
noun: sacrifice; plural noun: sacrifices
1. an act of slaughtering an animal or person or surrendering a possession as an offering to God or to a divine or supernatural figure.
“they offer sacrifices to the spirits”
synonyms: ritual slaughter, offering , oblation , immolation
“the sacrifice of animals”
•an animal, person, or object offered in a sacrifice.
synonyms: (votive) offering, burnt offering , gift , oblation
“the calf was a sacrifice”
•an act of giving up something valued for the sake of something else regarded as more important or worthy.
“we must all be prepared to make sacrifices”
synonyms: surrender , giving up, abandonment , renunciation , forfeiture , relinquishment, resignation , abdication
“joining a federation may result in the sacrifice of sovereignty”
•Christian Church
Christ’s offering of himself in the Crucifixion.
•Christian Church
the Eucharist regarded either (in Catholic terms) as a propitiatory offering of the body and blood of Christ or (in Protestant terms) as an act of thanksgiving.
•Chess
a move intended to allow the opponent to win a pawn or piece, for strategic or tactical reasons.
•Baseball
a bunted ball that puts the batter out but allows a base runner or runners to advance.
noun: sacrifice bunt; plural noun: sacrifice bunts
•Bridge
a bid made in the belief that it will be less costly to be defeated in the contract than to allow the opponents to make a contract.
noun: sacrifice bid; plural noun: sacrifice bids
verb
verb: sacrifice; 3rd person present: sacrifices; past tense: sacrificed; past participle: sacrificed; gerund or present participle: sacrificing
1. offer or kill as a religious sacrifice.
“the goat was sacrificed at the shrine”
synonyms: offer up, immolate , slaughter
“two goats were sacrificed”
Source:
https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=DlOkVryHI-GM8Qfh7TU&gws_rd=ssl#q=what+is+sacrifice
Thanks.
LikeLike
Paul,
I agree that Zechariah nor his wife were condemned to hell. Let’s not confuse scriptures with what some believers may say with their lips. But I believe that the sacrifice of Jesus has deeper implications than just “saving us from our sins”. Daniel 9:24 explains “Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.” Likewise Isaiah 53 mentions a servant who is vindicated by God who allowed him to go through the suffering, verse 11: “From the toil of his soul he would see, he would be satisfied; with his knowledge My servant would vindicate the just for many, and their iniquities he would bear.” I know you don’t believe Isaiah 53 is about Jesus, but whatever happened to Jesus, God did it for the sake of the world as is written in Isaiah 49:6 “It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.”
Speaking of gentiles, that brings me to the next point. You said that Christians follow virtually none of the 613 commandments, yet we are not all living in Israel where it is not even possible for anyone to follow all 613 commandments because some of them involve affairs about the Temple which no longer exists. Plus, many of them were to be observed in the land of Israel by Jews and foreigners alike. Besides that, Acts 15 mentions a council in Jerusalem where matters of the Law were discussed and it was decided that the burden on new gentiles who just came into the faith should not be too great. The ancient children of Israel spent 40 years being trained to observe the Law and even after that they could not always get it right. Christianity (Still a part of Judaism at this point) was just starting to grow and was expanding beyond Jerusalem, where many gentiles were still used to their own customs. On top of that they had no actual leader who could enforce these laws upon people, as is the case with Islam. Acts 15:19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.” This was to be the basis upon which the gentile believers could establish their faith from in terms of laws and commands. Apart from that, Jesus also did much to explain the essence of the Law and teachings of the Prophets which I’ve already quoted above. To love God and to love your neighbour as yourself, and to treat other people the way you’d like to be treated – these things form the essence of the whole scriptures. This I would say, is what God truly wants to see in human beings. If you’re too caught up on saying we should “precisely” follow this or that commandment, you’re missing the point and you’re in danger of being like the Pharisees that Jesus had much to say about. John 13:34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”
Besides all of this, Jews in general acknowledge that not all Gentiles can observe the entire Law of Moses so they say that the Noahide Laws (or 7 laws of Noah) apply to the rest of humanity instead. This forms the basis of most of what I quoted from Acts 15 which includes: Belief in God, avoiding blaspheming God, not to murder or steal, no sexual immorality, and another important one is for the gentile nations to establish courts/legal systems for people to obey laws.
LikeLike
Koran 5:14. And from those who call themselves Christians, We took their covenant, but they have abandoned a good part of the Message that was sent to them…
Hmm so Allah acknowledges that he did in fact have a covenant with Christians even if they apparently messed things up. So how can Ijaz say Christianity is not a continuation of Jewish Halacha?
Still haven’t answered my question,
What the heck is your sharia mister? If Islam can’t clearly define it, how can you?
LikeLike