Comparing Islam to Christianity

[Seagoon]

Hello Bozon,

Originally posted by bozon
You have to remember that the old testement - ancient judaism was a religion ment for the Hebrews ONLY - and this is the major point in which christianity (and later Islam) diverges from judaism.

Christianity views the Old and New Testaments as being two parts of one book. The Old Testament chronicling the fall of man, and the beginning and progress of God's work of redemption and looking forward to the coming of the Messiah/Redeemer. The New Testament hails the arrival of the Messiah Jesus and then presents His work of redemption, the spread of that gospel message via the church he established, and then points forward to the final completion of God's redeeming work in the second coming.

For example, read the specifically Messianic passages of Isaiah 53 or Malachi 3, or Psalm 22 with the constant refrain that the redeemer who is the Lord would come forth from Israel and that as a result someday all the nations would worship the Lord God.  
"All the ends of the world Shall remember and turn to the LORD, And all the families of the nations Shall worship before You. For the kingdom is the LORD's, And He rules over the nations. (Psalm 22:28-29)

In the preaching of John the Baptist at the beginning of the New Testament one sees constant reference to these Old Testament prophecies of the coming of the Messiah, together with John's declaration that Jesus is the one those prophecies were pointing to, for example:

"The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! "This is He of whom I said, 'After me comes a Man who is preferred before me, for He was before me.' "I did not know Him; but that He should be revealed to Israel, therefore I came baptizing with water." And John bore witness, saying, "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and He remained upon Him. "I did not know Him, but He who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'Upon whom you see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, this is He who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.' "And I have seen and testified that this is the Son of God."" Again, the next day, John stood with two of his disciples. And looking at Jesus as He walked, he said, "Behold the Lamb of God!"

As far as the Law is concerned, the New Testament specifically states that it was because all men had broken God's law and were in danger of judgment that Jesus had to atone for sin on the cross.

What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." (Romans 3:9;3:19-26)

Keep in mind that the above sections from Romans were written by Paul, a Jew and a Pharisee, and certainly a man with a solid working knowledge both theoretically and experimentally of the Law of God.

Regarding the Law of God itself, Christians hold that the Ceremonial provisions forshadowed and pointed forward to the coming of Christ, and that their requirements were fulfilled by him, the Moral requirements on the other hand are an eternal expression of the holiness of God and could only be kept perfectly by Christ, which he did on behalf of his sheep. Most Christians believe that the ten commandments are still an eternal rule and guide for our life however.

Orthodox Jews, of course, deny the claims of Christ to be the Messiah and hold that the Messiah has not yet come. Many Reform Jews, view Judaism as purely cultural and are not expecting a literal Messiah.

Muslims, on the other hand, believe that Jesus (known as Isa in the Quran) was merely a human prophet who came to prepare the way for the coming of the final prophet and the perfected religion - Muhammad and Islam. They deny both Christ's death on the cross and his resurrection.

- SEAGOON

[Edbert1]

Originally posted by Seagoon
Muslims, on the other hand, believe that Jesus (known as Isa in the Quran) was merely a human prophet who came to prepare the way for the coming of the final prophet and the perfected religion - Muhammad and Islam. They deny both Christ's death on the cross and his resurrection.

See, that is where I have a problem with the logical aspects of this. In my opinion there is no middle ground on the subject of Jesus. Anyone who says he was a wise man, a prophet, a teacher, or other such description is being intellectually dishonest.

If you disbeleive in the existance of Jesus, fine. If you beleive he was a false prophet, fine. If you beleive he was right, fine. All of those views hold water.

Jesus said he was the one God made flesh and walking on the earth. If he said that and was wrong then that makes him insane or a liar not wise or a teacher/prophet.

On the subject of Jesus there are only two outcomes assuming you acknowlege his physical existance as a man; one he was who he said he was, or two, he was a nutjob.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Edbert

On the subject of Jesus there are only two outcomes assuming you acknowlege his physical existance as a man; one he was who he said he was, or two, he was a nutjob.

Three... he did exist, but his lineage (and his life story) was grossly exaggerated by the men that knew him.

[Edbert1]

Originally posted by Sandman
Three... he did exist, but his lineage (and his life story) was grossly exaggerated by the men that knew him.

Implying that he never said the things attributed to him?

[Seagoon]

Hangtime,

I'd like to issue a serious challenge, which I hope might help to put things in perspective. What I would like to challenge you to do is simply to list as many examples as you can FROM THIS YEAR (2005), of Christians persecuting, oppressing, or attacking Muslims merely because they happen to be faithful followers of Islam. I will endeavor to do the same on the other side. You may feel free to hold my feet to the fire, dispute the examples I use, and show how they are either bogus or not examples of Muslims persecuting Christians because of their faith.

The only restrictions that I would ask is that we not use examples that are clearly direct acts of revenge (i.e. Muslims attacking a Christian village because they themselves were attacked by that village the day before) or examples where the religion is clearly coincidental (i.e. a Muslim unaware of his victims religion mugs a Christian because he wants his watch).

If the thesis you seem to be advancing, that fundamentalist Christians are just as dangerous and prone to persecute as "fundamentalist" Muslims, then we should clearly be able to see multi-national parity between the two camps. In fact, we should see the most Christian violence and active oppression of Muslims in the countries with the highest percentage of fundamentalist evangelical protestants.

Anyway here are just a few examples of  Muslims oppressing Christians from this year (I'm not doing any deep digging here):

1) Indonesia - Thursday June 23, 2005
THREE WOMEN ARRESTED, CHARGED
Leaders of ‘Happy Sunday’ program accused of attempted conversion.

A Muslim council has accused three Indonesian women of attempting to convert Muslim children under the guise of a Christian education program. Dr. Rebekka Zakaria, Eti Pangesti and Ratna Bangun were arrested on May 13 and eventually taken to the Indramayu State Prison in West Java, where they await trial. If convicted of breaching the Child Protection Law, they could each face a prison sentence of up to five years and a fine of up to 100,000,000 rupees ($103,600). A lawyer acting for the local Majelis Ulama Indonesia council asked that bail be refused for the women. Meanwhile, lawyers are preparing for a trial that could make headlines in a nation still clearly divided along religious lines.
You have to see the picture of these dangerous threats to Muslim safety

2) Pakistan - Monday March 28, 2005
WORSHIPPERS ATTACKED ON EASTER SUNDAY
One Christian killed, seven injured in village church shooting.

Armed gunmen attacked Christian worshippers as they emerged from Easter services in a village church yesterday, killing one man and injuring seven other congregants. Irshad Masih, in his early 20s, died from a bullet that struck his head during a half hour of indiscriminate shooting by four attackers. Seven other victims suffering severe gunshot wounds were hospitalized at Lahore’s Jinnah Hospital. Two police guards were reportedly absent from their post at 10:30 a.m. yesterday, when attackers opened fire at Victory Church International in Khamba village near Lahore. Police later said they had arrested two of the four suspects in the shooting, and attributed the attack to a local land dispute. Local observers discounted that version of events. “Actually, it is terrorism,” one source told Compass. “They attacked people and started indiscriminate firing upon a congregation of some 150 people!”

3) Bangladesh - Monday April 04, 2005
LAY PASTOR BEHEADED
Widow fears reprisals from murderers as she struggles to support her family.

Sources have confirmed the murder by beheading on March 8 of Dulal Sarkar, a lay pastor and evangelist in Bangladesh. Sarkar worked with the Bangladesh Free Baptist Church in Jalalpur village as an evangelist and church planter. On the night of March 8 as he returned home, he was attacked and killed by Muslim extremists. His wife, Aruna, immediately filed a case against the killers, and three suspects were arrested. However, militants are now threatening Aruna and her children. The beheading is the second in the space of a year. Dr. Abdul Gani, a respected Christian leader, was decapitated by a gang of assailants in September 2004.

4) Iran - Thursday February 17, 2005
GOVERNMENT JAILS CHRISTIAN PASTOR FOR THREE YEARS
Military court claims convert’s documents were falsified.

February 17 (Compass) -- Yesterday a Tehran military court sentenced Iranian Christian pastor Hamid Pourmand to jail for three years, ordering his immediate transfer to a group prison cell in Tehran’s notorious Evin Prison. The former army colonel was found guilty of deceiving the armed forces by not declaring that he was a convert from Islam to Christianity. It is illegal for a non-Muslim to serve as a military officer in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Pourmand, a Christian for nearly 25 years, produced several original documents in which his military superiors had acknowledged years ago that he was a Christian. “But the court didn’t accept them," an Iranian source said. “They said these were false documents.” The verdict represented the maximum penalty for Pourmand’s alleged offense. As a consequence, the lay pastor of the Assemblies of God faces automatic discharge from the army and forfeits his entire income, pension and housing for his family.
[Pourmand was arrested with 80 other pastors when the General Conference meeting of the Assemblies of God denomination in Iran was raided by the authorities]

5) Pakistan - Monday April 11, 2005
PASTOR AND DRIVER MURDERED
Kidnapping followed threats for ‘converting Muslims.’

Unknown killers kidnapped and brutally killed Protestant pastor Babar Samsoun and his driver and fellow evangelist, Daniel Emmanuel, on April 7. One of Samsoun’s colleagues reported that the slain pastor was “accused of trying to convert Muslims to Christianity.” The two men had been receiving telephoned threats demanding that they stop their Christian activities. Police authorities blamed the killings on an alleged family dispute. “Protest marches are still continuing for the arrest of the culprits,” a local church leader confirmed today, noting that the Christian community was “fearful and demoralized, as they feel nothing is being done by the authorities to safeguard them from such barbarous attacks.” Samsoun, 37, pastored the congregation of the Jesus Pan Gospel Church in Yousafabad. He leaves behind a wife and three children. Emmanuel, also in his mid 30s, was unmarried.

6) Philippines - Friday December 03, 2004

A 24-year-old Christian man in Zamboanga City, Philippines, is recovering from serious injuries after being shot by Muslim activists on November 17. Friends and family have asked that the victim not be identified by name, as they believe the three men who attacked him and left him for dead are likely to come back to finish the job. In recent years, efforts to spread Islam among the majority Christian population have increased. Several Muslim terrorist organizations exist in the Philippines, such as the Abu Sayyaf and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, which have been linked to Al-Qaeda. According to police sources, the groups are attracting new converts to Islam in greater numbers than Muslims born into the faith. “Converts are ideal terrorists because they are eager to prove themselves worthy of their new faith,” Chief Superintendent of Police Rodolfo Mendoza recently told a journalist.

I'll stop there for lack of space, but if you find the above inconclusive, I can certainly provide a lot more...

- SEAGOON

[Simaril]

Originally posted by Edbert
See, that is where I have a problem with the logical aspects of this. In my opinion there is no middle ground on the subject of Jesus. Anyone who says he was a wise man, a prophet, a teacher, or other such description is being intellectually dishonest.

If you disbeleive in the existance of Jesus, fine. If you beleive he was a false prophet, fine. If you beleive he was right, fine. All of those views hold water.

Jesus said he was the one God made flesh and walking on the earth. If he said that and was wrong then that makes him insane or a liar not wise or a teacher/prophet.

On the subject of Jesus there are only two outcomes assuming you acknowlege his physical existance as a man; one he was who he said he was, or two, he was a nutjob.

Knowingly or not, you're referencing C.S. Lewis' classic quote:

....He told people their sins were forgiven, and never waited to consult all the other people whom their sins had undoubtedly injured....

A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic -- on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg -- or else he would be the devil of hell....You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit on him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord an God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. [/B][/COLOR]

[Seagoon]

Originally posted by Sandman
Three... he did exist, but his lineage (and his life story) was grossly exaggerated by the men that knew him.

Sandman,

This won't hold water as the apostles preached the gospel to people who knew Jesus and had watched him. Read the first 9 chapters of the book of Acts, the initial growth of the church came in Jerusalem only a few weeks after Christ's crucifixion. The apostles preached that He was the Messiah, that he had done signs and wonders, and that most importantly He had risen again, had these all been obvious lies, they would have been laughed out of the city. The very growth and existence of the early church in Palestine within living memory of the people who had listened to him militates against this conclusion. Plus, it simply moves the accusation to the apostles, that they were shameless con-men willing to endure persecution, to be tortured, and to die for what they knew to be lies.

The fact is, regardless of how we feel about it, the apostolic church believed these truth claims even though they were in a direct position to refute them. Even the contemporaries of Christ who opposed Him did not call his works exaggerations, they openly accused him of being an agent of Satan.

- SEAGOON

[Simaril]

Originally posted by Seagoon snip


...Plus, it simply moves the accusation to the apostles, that they were shameless con-men willing to endure persecution, to be tortured, and to die for what they knew to be lies.

The fact is, regardless of how we feel about it, the apostolic church believed these truth claims even though they were in a direct position to refute them...

snip

- SEAGOON

This is a really important point. Most conspiracies fall apart as soon as things get a bit hot -- and the more people are involved, the less heat it takes for ONE of the group to break.

But if we consider those who supposedly were in on the supposed "scam" we find that they all underwent severe persecution, most commonly to the death.

How likely is that?

[Sandman]

True enough, Seagoon. OTOH, some people see the Virgin Mary on a piece of toast.



People are generally lousy observers of what is wondrous (or not).


Damn, I'm in a cynical mood.

[Seagoon]

Originally posted by Sandman
True enough, Seagoon. OTOH, some people see the Virgin Mary on a piece of toast.



People are generally lousy observers of what is wondrous (or not).


Damn, I'm in a cynical mood.

Hi Sandman,

Sorry about your mood, I hope it improves. I'm just coming out of several days of  crankiness myself.

Anywho, the difference between this and finding Mary on your toast, is that those things are issue of perception, "I think I see Mary!" However wiith Jesus what we have are public and deliberate miracles that were done specifically to prove that He and His message were authentic. As in Luke 5:23-26

"Which is easier, to say, 'Your sins are forgiven you,' or to say, 'Rise up and walk'? "But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins" -- He said to the man who was paralyzed, "I say to you, arise, take up your bed, and go to your house." Immediately he rose up before them, took up what he had been lying on, and departed to his own house, glorifying God. And they were all amazed, and they glorified God and were filled with fear, saying, "We have seen strange things today!"

Throughout the rest of the New Testament, the Apostles make mention of these unambiguous miracles in speeches and letters addressed to Christ's contemporaries, for instance, Peter's declaration before a crowd of thousands gathered to celebrate the feast of weeks:

"Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know --" (Acts 2:22)

Now this is also one of the areas where Christianity dramatically differs from many other religions such as Islam. Islam is closer to gnostic religions in that the claim of the leader, was to have "revealed knowledge" that he received secretly and was commissioned to impart to others. In the case of Muhammad it was secret revelation given to him by Gabriel in the wilderness. No confirmation of these claims was possible, even amongst his contemporaries - one either believed his account or one didn't. On the other hand, in the case of Christ and the Apostles we are talking about a church founded on public miracles and public teaching.

- SEAGOON

PS: Sorry for being so "toastless"

[Sandman]

In other words, you have great faith in the observations made by the Apostles.

Occupational hazard...




I'm going to move on... consider me a heckler.

[rshubert]

Originally posted by Hangtime
Ok.. so what's that make this guy:

Ladies and gentlemen, Christianity offers the only viable, reasonable, definitive answer to the questions of 'Where did I come from?' 'Why am I here?' 'Where am I going?' 'Does life have any meaningful purpose?' Only Christianity offers a way to understand that physical and moral border. Only Christianity offers a comprehensive worldview that covers all areas of life and thought, every aspect of creation. Only Christianity offers a way to live in response to the realities that we find in this world -- only Christianity.

or This guy:

If we are going to save America and evangelize the world, we cannot accommodate secular philosophies that are diametrically opposed to Christian truth.

Hmmmmmm???

Would surely love to find some negative christian sourced commentary regarding these position statements.

Did any of these guys suggest that the congregation put on a bomb vest and take a trip to Cairo, or did I miss something?

Why do you equate profession of a belief system--and claiming that the belief system is correct and provides answers--with the deliberate killing of innocents in the name of a belief system?  Don't you see that you are falling into an intellectual trap?  

Let's put it this way.  Evaluate the following statements as either true, false, or indeterminate:

Some believers are dangerous fanatic.
X is a believer.
Therefore, X is a dangerous fanatic.

It doesn't hold water, logically.  You can't lump all of any group together, can you?  I don't lump all Muslims in the group of dangerous fanatic, just the ones who support or perform dangerous, fanatical acts.

[rshubert]

Originally posted by Hangtime
Hi Gunthr!

'secular humanists' ?? Thats kinds slippery.. I guess I'm a secular humanist, yes?

The two quotes are quite specific, and clearly call for 'one religion'.. in this case; christianity. (there's a heap more like it, prostylized stuff from every major faith is out there, this ain't JUST a 'christian' problem.. it's a 'religion' problem) If you are a christian, I'd expect you'd not find anything 'wrong' with the quotes above. If your not, it's the equivelent of fingernails on a chalkboard.

It would seem that one of the most difficult propositions for a christian (or, insert whatever your favorite faith is here) is discerning where 'right' ends and 'wrong' begins when it comes to promoting their faith.. intolerance is just that:  'intolerant'. It can't be pared down any further than that. Considering the immense amount of angst associated with any religious debate, commentary that casts their favorite flavor in a controversial light tends to be the equivelent of handling nitro..

Back to the concept of religious intolerance.. It's just wrong. Now; how are we gonna fight the islamic extremists without committing religious warfare?

and lastly.. congrats to all involved so far.. this thread, this subject has exceeded my expectations in both quality and quantity of reasoned debate!

How can you equate "fingernails on a chalkboard" disagreement with someone's beliefs with terrorism?  That is to say, don't you see the difference between espousing a belief and murder?  You seem to be taking your distaste for Christianity, the fact that the terrorists we are fighting are Muslim, adding the two together and coming up with the idea that all religion is bad.

Religion isn't bad.  Religion gives one a moral anchor.  Religion provides a guide to the individual on how to live life.

Take the ten commandments, for example.  Aside from the "obey God" stuff, there are rules in there about how to deal with other people, on this earth.  Stuff like, "don't commit murder", and "don't steal".

What's wrong with that?  Belief in God aside, what can you POSSIBLY find wrong with the moral code in the Old and New Testament, the Torah, the Quran, and any number of other religious texts?

You are confusing the PRACTICE of religion with the LESSONS of religion.  People are imperfect.  People have their own agendas.  People form churches.

[hacksaw1]

The New Testament canon and the Nicene Council

It's been alleged that the New Testament is not trustworthy because presumed self-serving religious leaders fixed the canon of Scripture at their discretion during the Nicene Council of 325.
 
But according to Eusebius (3rd-4th century) there was a firm, recognized corpus of accepted writings among Christian communities prior to the Nicene Council of 325. The accepted writings include the vast majority of what we know as the New Testament. If the disputed books were left out, the Gospel would nevertheless stand as firm as ever.

The info is found in Eusebius' ten book Ecclesiastical History. The tenth and final book was dedicated to Paulinus of Tyre who died at the end of 323 or in 324, i.e. before the Nicene Council was convened in 325. So Eusebius' third book containing the information in question is far earlier than 325.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-01/Npnf2-01-08.htm#P1923_887432

Eusebius 3:3
Chapter XXV. The Divine Scriptures that are Accepted and Those that are Not.
 
1 …First then …the four Gospels; …following them the Acts of the Apostles.

2 … the epistles of Paul; … former epistle of John,…the epistle of Peter. After them is to be placed, if it really seem proper, the Apocalypse of John,…These then belong among the accepted writings.
 
3 …the disputed writings, which are nevertheless recognized by many, are extant the so-called epistle of James and that of Jude, also the second epistle of Peter, and those that are called the second and third of John whether they belong to the evangelist or to another person of the same name.

4 … the rejected writings must be reckoned also the Acts of Paul, and the so-called Shepherd, and the Apocalypse of Peter, and in addition to these the extant epistle of Barnabas, and the so-called Teachings of the Apostles; and besides, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it seem proper, which some, as I said, reject, but which others class with the accepted books.
 
5 And among these some have placed also the Gospel according to the Hebrews, with which those of the Hebrews that have accepted Christ are especially delighted. And all these may be reckoned among the disputed books.
 
6 …we have felt compelled to give this catalogue in order that we might be able to know both these works and those that are cited by the heretics under the name of the apostles, including, for instance, such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas, of Matthias, or of any others besides them, and the Acts of Andrew and John and the other apostles, which no one belonging to the succession of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy of mention in his writings.

7 And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage, and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics. Wherefore they are not to be placed even among the rejected writings, but are all of them to be cast aside as absurd and impious.

See also:

http://www.ntcanon.org/authorities.shtml

By the way, this list of recognized trustworthy sources also strikes at the Muslim contention that the Gospel was corrupted, since there exist today many manuscripts of the NT prior to the Nicene Council.

Best regards,

Cement