Larry, your response is kind of all over the place.  Many of the claims you have made are separate topics in themselves.  For instance, you brought up the claim that the OT and the NT are in agreement on the issue of the Messiah.  There are many who believe that this is a false assertion, including myself.  If you want to discuss these issues, I would be more than glad to.  In fact, I have already had many discussions with your fellow Christians and I have always felt that they could not satisfactorily answer for all the discrepancies that exist. 

The point of my post was to show you that you were misunderstanding Hasan's explanation, even though it was clear and concise.  You made some assumptions based on a misunderstanding of his post.  I intervened to point that out to you. 

BTW, just to make it more clearer...evidence does exist that the Christians have deviated from Jesus' message, as the Quran claims.  If you like, we can discuss this.  Perhaps you would like to go to the "The Holy Gospel did not evolve!" thread opened by JackCatholic.  I made a post there showing proof that scribes have made additions and deletions to the NT and that even the early Church fathers decried this behavior.  I would love to hear what you think about that.  Thank you.
  

islamispeace,

   Your idea of "clear and concise" is much different than mine. There are actually two "Messiahs" in the Old Testament, one who is despised and rejected of many and one who is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. The reason that the Jews did not recognize Jesus Christ as the Messiah was because they wanted the second "Messiah" to relieve them of the tyranny and control of the Roman Empire. The "second" Messiah is Jesus Christ who will return at the end of the world and judge the living and the dead.

   The first Messiah, prophesied by Isaiah, was rejected and despised by many and was beaten, tortured and killed on the cross, but this was necessary to fulfill what He came to earth to do, sacrifice Himself for all of mankind. There was no need afterward for a Jewish Temple and animal sacrifices because Christ IS that Temple and sacrificed Himself. Im-man-u-el "God with us."

   You say, "The point of my post was to show you that you were misunderstanding Hasan's explanation, even though it was clear and concise. You made some assumptions based on a misunderstanding of his post. I intervened to point that out to you."

   That is exactly what I feel you have done with my explanations of the basics of Christianity. You make assumptions, based on the Quran, that are simply in error and pass them off a fact. Perhaps you should let Hasan speak for himself next time.

   And again you make a statement, "BTW, just to make it more clear(er)...evidence does exist that the Christians have deviated from Jesus's message, as the Quran claims."

   I rest my case. I don't use the Qur'an to "prove" that I am right, and for you to do so is simply more self-righteous posturing based on your Quran, I prefer to put my faith in Jesus Christ of the New Testament, that is ALL about the birth, life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Without Jesus Christ being the Messiah and resurrecting from the dead there would be no New Testament, because the whole work is a description of Jesus as the Son of God. The earliest copy of the complete New Testament is from the early 5th century A.D., two centuries before the birth of Muhammad.

   You can't pick and choose what parts of the New Testament that you believe are true and which ones that you don't. It would be like me saying that I agree with the Quran except for any mention of Allah. Whether you know "many who believe" things about the Bible is simply pointless, I could say the same of any number of other interpretations and beliefs of any religion on earth.

   Your statement, "I made a post there showing proof that scribes have made additions and deletions to the NT and that even the early Church fathers decried this behavior."

   Yes, I agree. There are various "books" supposedly of the Bible that were not accepted as authentic in the   present New Testament, usually referred to as the "Apocrypha" and also this is true of the so-called "Gnostic Gospels."

   This is also true of the Quran that there were variant readings of it, so much so that the Caliph Uthman compiled the "authorized" version of the Quran and destroyed the others. To believe that the Quran came down as a single work that was accurate to each letter in each word in it is simply simplistic and ill-informed and ignores historical sources.

   The Holy Bible is today the most widely read and the most researched book in history. Research and scholarship regarding the Bible are encouraged and critical thinking and commentaries about it has been done for centuries. For if the Bible does not stand up to the most rigorous of examinations then it cannot be regarded as true.

   But this conversation has become pointless because no one is going to change their position and I am just as firm in my faith and beliefs as you are. I don't accept the Quran as the final word of God nor do I recognize Muhammad as an actual prophet because I have never seen proof of any "prophecies" that he made that later came true, which is the Biblical standard for prophets.

   Every prophet in the Bible is named and their prophecies described in detail. Muhammad is not mentioned by name or even alluded to in the Bible (some people claim that he is the one referred to as a "paraclete" or helper, but why this "paraclete" would not be named, or at least described in some detail, is unclear and vague and could refer to any number of people or celestial beings). There is no indication in the Bible that there would be future "true prophets," but the Bible is clear that there will be many "false prophets" that would arise but they would not meet the Biblical standard for a true prophet of God because they are not.

   I would be interested if you could provide any examples of prophecies that Muhammad made that later came true just as prophsied. Isaiah was correct 700 years before his prophecy (Isaiah Chapter 53) concerning the Messiah actually came true. Jesus Christ made a number of prophecies, one of which was that the Jewish Temple would be utterly destroyed so that "not one stone was left upon another." No one in Jerusalem could believe that the splendid and huge Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount could ever be so utterly destroyed. But this prophecy became fulfilled approximately 40 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, when the General, and future Emperor, Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D. after the Jewish Revolt. A historical fact that is represented on the walls of the Arch of Titus in Rome, showing the menorah and other treasures of the Temple being brought in triumph to Rome.

   Interestingly, Jesus Christ also said that he could "rebuild the Temple" in three days, which is what he did when he was resurrected three days after His crucifixion, having offered Himself as the ultimate and last sacrifice, negating any need for a new Temple to be built.

   I really don't see any point in continuing this endless thread that goes nowhere because there is no one here who is going to question their own faith or change their mind about what they see as the "truth." It is simply a matter of faith, and that is one thing that can never be "proved" by the Bible or the Quran or any other holy books of other religions. I appreciate and honor your deep and true faith in Islam and would hope that you would do the same with me and Christianity.

Peace to you and all,

Larry

    

Edited by Larry - 02 May 2011 at 11:57pm

Larry, you are right.  My view of what it means to be clear and concise is very different from what it means to you.  While I was only adding to the simple explanation by Hasan, you have been going off on tangents which are completely unrelated to the discussion and misrepresenting what I said.  Case in point:



When did I "use the Qur'an"?  All I said was that there is evidence that Christians have deviated from Jesus' message, as the Quran says.  In other words, there is evidence outside of the Quran to support that claim.  As I said before, we can discuss this if you wish. 

Your claim that there are "two Messiahs" is unsubstantiated and is just another example of a Christian argument which is just not true.  No where in the OT is there such a concept.  Rather, "THE Messiah" is all there is.  The Jews have been waiting for him for a long time.  This is more a problem for Christians than it is for Muslims, since the latter do not recognize the OT as authoritative anyway.  The absence of the second coming from the OT creates serious problems for Christians, in my opinion.

 

Right, so what does that tell you?  If it took around 400 years to get a complete copy of the New Testament, which claims to be an account of the teachings of Jesus (pbuh), is it not possible that the original message was lost?  As I said before, there is evidence for this. 



This is true, but I was not referring to the apocryphal books.  One early bishop named Dionysius decried the behavior of his followers, whom he accused of altering his letters!  The fact that the early Church leaders were aware of these scribal changes is strong evidence that the Christian Bible is not what has been claimed by Christians.



This is typical Christian polemics.  We are talking about the Bible and somehow the discussion switches to the Quran!  Just for your information, there is no comparison between the Bible and the Quran.  You say that there are "variant readings" of the Quran.  Okay, sure.  I agree.  But what does that entail?  If you want a full understanding of this concept, I suggest you read the book "Variant Readings of the Quran: A Criticial Study of Their Historical and Linguistic Origins" by Ahmad Ali Al-Imam.  What you will find is that the "variant readings" are not due to deliberate scribal changes (additions and deletions), as we have seen in the Bible, but due to the fact that the Quran was revealed in seven styles/dialects (ahruf).  You will also find that these variations do not alter the meaning of the Quran. 



Yes, exactly!  And what any serious person will see is that "...the Bible [indeed] does not stand up to the most rigorous examinations..." 



Fair enough.  But this begs the question...what on earth are you doing here then?  I don't understand why you guys come on these forums and then say the conversations are "pointless"?  What do you think we would be discussing here?  Sports?  Movies?



Okay.  So, where is Jesus mentioned by name?  Please don't refer to the misquotes of Isaiah 53 and others.  Where is Jesus mentioned by name?  Where does it say that a prophet named "Jesus, son of Mary" would come? 



From where do you get the idea that "[t]here is no indication in the Bible that there would be future "true prophets..."?  Where does it say that? 

And what is the "Biblical standard for a true prophet of God..."?



Certainly.  You can check out the following links:

http://muslim-responses.com/The_Prophecies/The_Prophecies_

http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/379/#_ftn10293

An example is when the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) prophesied that Jerusalem would be conquered after his death.  This came true when the Caliph Umar conquered Jerusalem 638 CE, just 6 years after the death of the prophet.



This may be true but the fact of the matter is that the Gospels claim that Jesus also said that the present generation (referring to his disciples) would live to see his second coming.  Obviously, this did not come to fruition.  Does that make Jesus a false prophet?  Not at all.  It just puts into question the reliability of the Gospels as authentic accounts of Jesus' teachings.



Oh absolutely. 

I just wish you were a little less defensive.  Just relax.   




Edited by islamispeace - 04 May 2011 at 4:32pm

Larry, your posts are increasingly showing signs of open hostility.  I guess I have hit a nerve or something. 



I said that we can discuss this if you want.  I was holding back because I was not sure whether you were really into this conversation or not.  If you do want to discuss the issue, I am all for it.  I will wait for your confirmation and then I will present some of the evidence. 



This is your opinion, nothing more.  When I read Isaiah 53, I see no correlation between what the Gospels say about Jesus and what Isaiah says.  The only way Christians can make a correlation is if they quote certain verses out of context.  In fact, most of the alleged prophecies which supposedly were fulfilled by the Gospel accounts are simply verses which have been taken completely out of context.  Isaiah 53 is one example.  What you may not realize is that Isaiah 53 is actually a continuation of Isaiah 52, and there the "servant" is described as someone whose "appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being and his form marred beyond human likeness".  This certainly would not apply to Jesus, would it?



Now here, you commit a major blunder.  You state that Jesus is never referred to as a prophet.  Are you sure?  What about Matthew 21:11:

"The crowds answered, “This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.”"

What about John 6:14-15:

"After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, “Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.” ¹⁵ Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself."

You are obviously wrong, so I ask again.  Where in the OT is it stated that a prophet named "Jesus" would come? 



I can forgive your ignorance of the Quran and its history, since you obviously do not even know your own Bible that well, as the above blunder showed. 

You say that it is strange that God would reveal the Quran in seven dialects.  I find it strange that you would find that strange.  Wouldn't God want people to understand His word is whatever dialect was known to them?  Is that not practical?  The Arabs had various dialects and God revealed the Quran in those dialects to make it easier for them to learn it and memorize it.  Sahih Muslim shows us the wisdom behind revealing the Quran in seven dialects:

'Umar b. Khattab said: I heard Hisham b. Hakim b. Hizam reciting Surah al-Furqan in a style different from that in which I used to recite it, and in which Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) had taught me to recite it. I was about to dispute with him (on this style) but I delayed till he had finished that (the recitation). Then I caught hold of his cloak and brought him to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, I heard this man reciting Surah al-Furqan in a style different from the one in which you taught me to recite. Upon this the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) told (me) to leave him alone and asked him to recite. He then recited in the style in which I beard him recite it. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) then said: Thus was it sent down. He then told me to recite and I recited it, and he said: Thus was it sent down. The Qur'an was sent down in seven dialects. So recite what seems easy therefrom. (4:1782)

Try to use your reason, Larry and not you a priori assumptions.  Also try to ascertain the facts before making a statement.  You will save yourself some embarrassment. 



I have not even quoted the Quran here at all, so I don't know why you are bringing it up.  On the other hand, I have provided examples of why I feel the OT and NT are not always in agreement, which is a problem for Christians.

I see you had nothing to say about Muhammad's prophecies as well as the seemingly false prophecy attributed to Jesus about his second coming.  Do you have any comments?