Islam,Jesus and The Quran (reject, Moses, Earth, Messiah)

[YmirGF]

Originally Posted by Booko

Founders of religions invariably have titles as well as names. Abraham is called "Friend of God," Muhammad "Seal of the Prophets," Buddha "Enlightened One," and "The Bab" and "Baha'u'llah" are themselves titles, and not names.

And perhaps the simplest explanation is that "Son of God" is one of Jesus' titles, along with "Christ" (The Anointed) and "Emmanuel" (God With Us).

Quranic objections to Jesus being a "son" of God revolved around the totally literal and physical meaning of "son" -- not all possible meanings of "Son."

Yes Sharon, I realize all the above and the possibility of a genetic mutation. That's all pretty basic. I guess folks can just say I am being negative and "have an agenda" but to me, at least, the Christian view (and keep in mind I do not consider myself a Christian) makes sense. The Islamic view just doesn't make sense and is tantamont to "having their cake and eating it too". It just strikes me as disengenious. For example, if Jesus, the Christ IS the literal "son of god" or "SOG" then a rather large chunk of Islamic theology collapses. Conversely, if he is not then a rather large part of the Christian roof caves in.

Frankly speaking, I am a bit more aware of "avataric" personalities than the average mortal. I make no apologies for that nor do I care much if a single person believes me. It doesn't change anything. One day I may very well change my opinions regarding what I consider to be the false claims of Islam, however unlikely. It really does not mean a darn thing to me that 1.3-ish billion people vehemently disagree. In all honesty, I rather likes those odds.

Although I deeply respect their right to believe whatever they wish, I do not respect their beliefs themselves in the slightest. That is asking a bit too much. However, as I have said elsewhere I could easily tar and feather all other religions as well, even yours. I will simply NEVER be the type that says all religion is talking about the same thing as clearly they are not. Folks are welcome to look for similarities, but at a certain stage one really must take a stand and call a shovel, a shovel.

I guess the last thing to mention is that for many, many years I did subscribe to the oneness and unity of all religions, but eventually I began to see past that and now consider that type of thinking to be an illusion. They all have their crumbs but their loaves have turned to dust long ago. It is really of much importance that those crumbs look similar?

In my defense, I would tell you that people only need look within themselves. The light spoken of in their hollow little books shines very brightly within their own hearts and minds. It is an amazingly simple thing to grasp if they only recognized how to grasp that light. It is something all beings share in common. That is the real unity. That is the real Oneness. The point being - while folks sit reading their books -- they are no longer looking at the light within themselves -- and that is their error.

[9harmony]

Originally Posted by Booko

Founders of religions invariably have titles as well as names. Abraham is called "Friend of God," Muhammad "Seal of the Prophets," Buddha "Enlightened One," and "The Bab" and "Baha'u'llah" are themselves titles, and not names.

And perhaps the simplest explanation is that "Son of God" is one of Jesus' titles, along with "Christ" (The Anointed) and "Emmanuel" (God With Us).

Quranic objections to Jesus being a "son" of God revolved around the totally literal and physical meaning of "son" -- not all possible meanings of "Son."

one thing i have wondered, and perhaps someone who can read the bible in it's original language can help out, but what if what has been translated as "Son of God" is actually supposed to be "Sun of God".

whole different dynamic that could change everything!

[YmirGF]

Originally Posted by 9harmony

one thing i have wondered, and perhaps someone who can read the bible in it's original language can help out, but what if what has been translated as "Son of God" is actually supposed to be "Sun of God".

whole different dynamic that could change everything!

Now there is a novel approach. I have used exactly that connotation in my own writing. There is a very good reason for all the talk about "inner light" etc.

[9harmony]

Originally Posted by YmirGF

Now there is a novel approach. I have used exactly that connotation in my own writing. There is a very good reason for all the talk about "inner light" etc.

yes, 'inner light', and 'reflecting the Attributes of God', the prophets as the pure mirrors which reflect His Glory...etc.