Christianity vs. Islam

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

We can just as easily do this:
Christianity wants to build itself on the traditions of the Tanakh. But then distorts what is said. It blends it's 'new' religion from Moses, with old European pagan beliefs. So, yes. Christianity does not conform to the Teachings, or the Prophets, or the Writings. It distorts Judaism as a whole.

Christianity is built on the prophets, and on the Old Testament. It does run contrary to Judaism, but not to the Old Testament. But Judaism at present, has moved away from God.

Islam on the other hand changes what is said about God, and Christ, etc. etc. So, there is a big difference there. Christianity sees the Old Testament as the Word of God. Islam does not see the Bible as the Word of God.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

So are you, like Atheists, just saying here that the Prophets were just book characters?



How can it 'distort' the Bible? if the Qur'an is the word of God than the Bible (which is the word of man), is completely irrelevant.



It's the opposite. The Qur'an constantly speaks against such things.



You're missing the point here. You see supremacy in the Bible (for whatever reasons) but the Bible is irrelevant to the actual theological, metaphysical, socio-political and cosmic concerns espoused within the Abrahamic view of successive Prophets and the one-source (God ultimately, and Adam corporeally).



Because unlike Islam's views on other religions (which are very nuanced and sophisticated, not superficial), Christianity is the sworn enemy of anyone who denies Jesus as 'god-incarnate'. No matter how much you claim yourself to be a 'unique Christian', this is absolute the case; both with the New Testament itself and with Christian views historically, past and present.



As said in the above, this is exactly the problem.
The Islamic view however is different. Salvation is through God only and it is not based on the same faulty premise of Christianity. Salvation is transhistorical, not reduced down to belief in a single human being, claimed to be god-incarnate, contradicting everything else in the Abrahamic tradition.

This is what the Qur'an says:

Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabeans and the Christians and the Zoroastrians and those who associate (others with God)-- surely God will decide between them on the day of resurrection; surely God is a witness over all things.
- Surah 22:17



This reductionist view is the same thing that causes wars. You think of Islam as a monolith, which is blatantly fallacious. You think of Islam as an entity too, which is plain idiotic.

As far as Arabs, why are you so obsessed with them?

As the Qur'an says in Surah 41:44
And if We had made it a Quran in a foreign tongue, they would certainly have said: Why have not its communications been made clear? What! a foreign (tongue) and an Arab!
Say: It is to those who believe a guidance and a healing; and (as for) those who do not believe, there is a heaviness in their ears and it is obscure to them; these shall be called to from a far-off place.

It doesn't matter where God revealed a message or in what language, it will be revealed somewhere or in a language. Islam is not an Arab religion, in fact Muhammad had to frequently chastise people for trying to take that slant. Islam is a way of life and the devotion of pure-monotheism.



Yes because it unveils the prejudice lurking in the heart of that mindset. As well as an arrogance against the idea of understanding things.



You completely miss why I mentioned that. Either you admit the very heavy darkness at the root of most forms of Christianity or you cover your eyes and claim 'peace and love'.
Yes, you've already demonstrated the latter.



Like the previous, you completely miss the point of mentioning this. What Matthew 5-7 represents, is what the entire Abrahamic religion is meant to represent without hypocrisy. Whatever strange views you hold will not take away that the Qur'an teaches the same thing.
However I know that Matthew 5-7 is not the reason why so many Christians convert to Christianity, St John of Patmos' Apocalypse is more of the trajectory for so many of you. Fear of the imminent end-times is a good justification for spreading prejudice and violent tendencies, as well as right-out paranoia. Once you slow down and actually treat people like humans, then you'll find your true peace with God.

No, I said exactly what I said. Islam builds itself on the prophets and the Bible. But, it then distorts what the Bible says. That is not hard to understand.

Like I said, Islam is a blend of the new faith Muhammad brought with their, Arabs, old faith. What a blend. Muhammad's distortion of the Bible mixed with old Arab beliefs. During Islam's days or age of ignorance they worshiped rocks. One of these gods would be 'Allah'. And this pagan worship would involve the kabbah. This was were local gods would be worshiped. And the sacred 'black stone' would be center of that worship. And of course what do Muslims do today? If they can, they travel to Mecca, to the still existent kabbah and the 'sacred black stone'. And they direct their worship towards it. Have you gone to Mecca and kissed the black stone?

Where did I claim to be a unique Christian? Christianity has many enemies. Islam is just one. Does that make Christianity an enemy of Islam, of course. Where have I indicated anything different.?

You quoting verses to me from the Koran is like me quoting verses to you from the Bible. I do not doubt you believe the Koran. But it carries no weight with the Christian. And it carries less weight with this Christian.

Islam is an Arab religion, like I said. It is built upon the pagan worship of Arabs in their 'days of ignorance'. Which they are still in by the way. Have you gone to Mecca and kissed the 'black stone'? As I said, Islam's goal is to bring every country where the Muslims live under submission to Sharia Law. Under submission to Islam. Submit.

Sorry, being prejudice doesn't bother me. Of course I am prejudice towards what God has said in the Bible. And that is why Europe was Christianized....God.

No, I did not misunderstand what you said. I simply told you I'm not a what you call 'newagey christian'. Whether you believe it or not is immaterial. I'm just telling you I am not. Just because you want to place me in one or two categories, doesn't mean it is written in stone.

You know as much about (Matt. 5-7) as you do the Bible. When you say it is what 'Abrahamic religion' is supposed to represent without hypocrisy, you no doubt are speaking of Islam. You do with New Testament what Islam tries to do with the Old. Build on it, but distort it. You want, in some way, to have the connection with Christ, yet deny Him.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[sooda]

If you disagree with Christianity, why do you call yourself Christian. That is the label you use.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Because I see value even if the historicity of the patriarchs fell apart 40 years ago.

 

[sooda]

Christianity is built on the prophets, and on the Old Testament. It does run contrary to Judaism, but not to the Old Testament. But Judaism at present, has moved away from God.

Islam on the other hand changes what is said about God, and Christ, etc. etc. So, there is a big difference there. Christianity sees the Old Testament as the Word of God. Islam does not see the Bible as the Word of God.

Good-Ole-Rebel

So Judaism has moved away from God.. Hasn't Christianity moved to the words of Saul/Paul, Matthew and Luke?

 

[sooda]

No, I said exactly what I said. Islam builds itself on the prophets and the Bible. But, it then distorts what the Bible says. That is not hard to understand.

Like I said, Islam is a blend of the new faith Muhammad brought with their, Arabs, old faith. What a blend. Muhammad's distortion of the Bible mixed with old Arab beliefs. During Islam's days or age of ignorance they worshiped rocks. One of these gods would be 'Allah'. And this pagan worship would involve the kabbah. This was were local gods would be worshiped. And the sacred 'black stone' would be center of that worship. And of course what do Muslims do today? If they can, they travel to Mecca, to the still existent kabbah and the 'sacred black stone'. And they direct their worship towards it. Have you gone to Mecca and kissed the black stone?

Where did I claim to be a unique Christian? Christianity has many enemies. Islam is just one. Does that make Christianity an enemy of Islam, of course. Where have I indicated anything different.?

You quoting verses to me from the Koran is like me quoting verses to you from the Bible. I do not doubt you believe the Koran. But it carries no weight with the Christian. And it carries less weight with this Christian.

Islam is an Arab religion, like I said. It is built upon the pagan worship of Arabs in their 'days of ignorance'. Which they are still in by the way. Have you gone to Mecca and kissed the 'black stone'? As I said, Islam's goal is to bring every country where the Muslims live under submission to Sharia Law. Under submission to Islam. Submit.

Sorry, being prejudice doesn't bother me. Of course I am prejudice towards what God has said in the Bible. And that is why Europe was Christianized....God.

No, I did not misunderstand what you said. I simply told you I'm not a what you call 'newagey christian'. Whether you believe it or not is immaterial. I'm just telling you I am not. Just because you want to place me in one or two categories, doesn't mean it is written in stone.

You know as much about (Matt. 5-7) as you do the Bible. When you say it is what 'Abrahamic religion' is supposed to represent without hypocrisy, you no doubt are speaking of Islam. You do with New Testament what Islam tries to do with the Old. Build on it, but distort it. You want, in some way, to have the connection with Christ, yet deny Him.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Crossing Yam Suf was also crossing out of chaos (ignorance) of God.

 

[BeesAir7]

What is beautiful and pure about Islam is the devotion they have, they are always praying in the middle east.

The monk culture in the western society is fading

 

[sooda]

So are you, like Atheists, just saying here that the Prophets were just book characters?



How can it 'distort' the Bible? if the Qur'an is the word of God than the Bible (which is the word of man), is completely irrelevant.



It's the opposite. The Qur'an constantly speaks against such things.



You're missing the point here. You see supremacy in the Bible (for whatever reasons) but the Bible is irrelevant to the actual theological, metaphysical, socio-political and cosmic concerns espoused within the Abrahamic view of successive Prophets and the one-source (God ultimately, and Adam corporeally).



Because unlike Islam's views on other religions (which are very nuanced and sophisticated, not superficial), Christianity is the sworn enemy of anyone who denies Jesus as 'god-incarnate'. No matter how much you claim yourself to be a 'unique Christian', this is absolute the case; both with the New Testament itself and with Christian views historically, past and present.



As said in the above, this is exactly the problem.
The Islamic view however is different. Salvation is through God only and it is not based on the same faulty premise of Christianity. Salvation is transhistorical, not reduced down to belief in a single human being, claimed to be god-incarnate, contradicting everything else in the Abrahamic tradition.

This is what the Qur'an says:

Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabeans and the Christians and the Zoroastrians and those who associate (others with God)-- surely God will decide between them on the day of resurrection; surely God is a witness over all things.
- Surah 22:17



This reductionist view is the same thing that causes wars. You think of Islam as a monolith, which is blatantly fallacious. You think of Islam as an entity too, which is plain idiotic.

As far as Arabs, why are you so obsessed with them?

As the Qur'an says in Surah 41:44
And if We had made it a Quran in a foreign tongue, they would certainly have said: Why have not its communications been made clear? What! a foreign (tongue) and an Arab!
Say: It is to those who believe a guidance and a healing; and (as for) those who do not believe, there is a heaviness in their ears and it is obscure to them; these shall be called to from a far-off place.

It doesn't matter where God revealed a message or in what language, it will be revealed somewhere or in a language. Islam is not an Arab religion, in fact Muhammad had to frequently chastise people for trying to take that slant. Islam is a way of life and the devotion of pure-monotheism.



Yes because it unveils the prejudice lurking in the heart of that mindset. As well as an arrogance against the idea of understanding things.



You completely miss why I mentioned that. Either you admit the very heavy darkness at the root of most forms of Christianity or you cover your eyes and claim 'peace and love'.
Yes, you've already demonstrated the latter.



Like the previous, you completely miss the point of mentioning this. What Matthew 5-7 represents, is what the entire Abrahamic religion is meant to represent without hypocrisy. Whatever strange views you hold will not take away that the Qur'an teaches the same thing.
However I know that Matthew 5-7 is not the reason why so many Christians convert to Christianity, St John of Patmos' Apocalypse is more of the trajectory for so many of you. Fear of the imminent end-times is a good justification for spreading prejudice and violent tendencies, as well as right-out paranoia. Once you slow down and actually treat people like humans, then you'll find your true peace with God.

Christians have become more focused on Revelation and "end times" since the rise in Christian Zionism and the Scofield heresy.

I don't think it was always like that in the mainline churches.

 

[Rival]

Christians have become more focused on Revelation and "end times"

John and Jesus were apocalyptic preachers. End times theology is a huge part of Christianity.

 

[sooda]

John and Jesus were apocalyptic preachers. End times theology is a huge part of Christianity.

Its been a money maker for all manner of charlatans.. to include the likes of Samuel Untermyer, Hagee, Hal Lindsey, Tim Lahaye.

Apocalyptic literature was very, very popular from about 300 BC. People jump on the bandwagon without knowing when the book of Daniel was written or what Jesus said about the new world.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It does run contrary to Judaism, but not to the Old Testament.

My favorite example is Satan. There is no Devil in Judaism, and yet the Christians reinvented this angel into god's enemy. And, of course, if there is no Devil there is no Hell to imprison him in.

But Judaism at present, has moved away from God.

Don't you think that's arrogant to tell those who have been worshiping Abraham's god since the Bronze Age they after doing it wrong? They would say you are very far removed and violated "thou shalt have no other gods before me" when it comes to the trinity and elevating the son and Holly host to the status of god. I've even heard some the same applies with the Devil since it's acknowledging him as powerful enough to rebel against god, which is elevating and angel to the position of a god.
And, of course, Christians themselves move away from Christ because Jesus himself said there will be those who come along after him and claim to speak in his name, but be decieved not for they are false prophets, and here comes along Paul, after Christ, claiming to speak for him, totally opposite message, and has more sway on the modern church than Christ.

 

[sooda]

My favorite example is Satan. There is no Devil in Judaism, and yet the Christians reinvented this angel into god's enemy. And, of course, if there is no Devil there is no Hell to imprison him in.

Don't you think that's arrogant to tell those who have been worshiping Abraham's god since the Bronze Age they after doing it wrong? They would say you are very far removed and violated "thou shalt have no other gods before me" when it comes to the trinity and elevating the son and Holly host to the status of god. I've even heard some the same applies with the Devil since it's acknowledging him as powerful enough to rebel against god, which is elevating and angel to the position of a god.

The historicity of the patriarchs is full of errors.... which are passed on to Christians and Muslims.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

Because I see value even if the historicity of the patriarchs fell apart 40 years ago.

But, it's not just the history of the Old Testament that you view as 'fell apart', is it? Seems like you don't trust the history of the New Testament either.

If the history of the Old Testament is not true, there is no value, as it is completely necessary for the salvation of Christ to have any value.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

So Judaism has moved away from God.. Hasn't Christianity moved to the words of Saul/Paul, Matthew and Luke?

Christianity is based on Jesus Christ Who came both as Israel's Messiah, and the Saviour of mankind. It did not move from the revelation in the Old Testament to the New. It was a continuance and partial fulfilling of the revelation found in the Old Testament.

Yes, the books of Paul, and the Gospels are part of that revelation.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[sooda]

But, it's not just the history of the Old Testament that you view as 'fell apart', is it? Seems like you don't trust the history of the New Testament either.

If the history of the Old Testament is not true, there is no value, as it is completely necessary for the salvation of Christ to have any value.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Most of the OT is based on myths borrowed from other, earlier cultures.. There is no timeline. Its full of anachronisms and errors of geography.. Moses grew up in Pharaoh's house, but never knew his name.

The very existence of a "united kingdom" is in doubt. David's kingdom was less than 10 acres and a thousand people. The building and works attributed to Solomon were built by King Omri.

This stuff is MPORTANT.

The expected Jewish messiah was an anointed warrior king who would vanquish their enemies.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

My favorite example is Satan. There is no Devil in Judaism, and yet the Christians reinvented this angel into god's enemy. And, of course, if there is no Devil there is no Hell to imprison him in.

Don't you think that's arrogant to tell those who have been worshiping Abraham's god since the Bronze Age they after doing it wrong? They would say you are very far removed and violated "thou shalt have no other gods before me" when it comes to the trinity and elevating the son and Holly host to the status of god. I've even heard some the same applies with the Devil since it's acknowledging him as powerful enough to rebel against god, which is elevating and angel to the position of a god.
And, of course, Christians themselves move away from Christ because Jesus himself said there will be those who come along after him and claim to speak in his name, but be decieved not for they are false prophets, and here comes along Paul, after Christ, claiming to speak for him, totally opposite message, and has more sway on the modern church than Christ.

And if there is no Hell, there is not Heaven. And if there is no Heaven there is no God. And if, and if, and if...... If the person of satan is not believed by some in Judaism, is up to them. It doesn't change that he is there in the Old Testament. See him as the 'Adversary' in the book of Job. (Job 1:6-12) (The TANAKH, The Jewish Publication Society, 1985, p. 1339)

No, I don't think it is arrogant. One need only to follow their history as told in the Old Testament. They constantly killed the prophets and rebelled against God. Their condition in the world today is due to their rejection of God and His messengers. They are scattered all over the world. They have no Temple, no sacrifice. One need only believe their Old Testament.

I do wish you would give the verses when you say Jesus said this or that. I say that because there may be more than one place that it is said, and it's good to know which you are addressing to get the context right.

Concerning Paul, 'totally opposite message' is not the complete story. Paul's message continued the 'faith' that was established by God for salvation in the Old Testament, as Jesus Christ was the fulfillment of the 'Seed' promises in the Old Testament, upon which that faith is based.

Christ came first offering Himself to Israel as their Messiah and to bring in the Kingdom as promised in the Old Testament. This was all Old Testament ground. It was not Church doctrine by any stretch. Israel would not have it or Him. Thus the rejection, crucifixion, resurrection.

During the time of Christ's rejection, the Church is being formed. But the message the resurrected Christ gave to Paul is certainly different than that which He spoke to Israel. He came to Israel as Messiah and King, ready to receive the Kingdom. But, at present during the rejection, He comes as the Saviour of all in building His Church.

My point being: both are the messages of Christ.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

Most of the OT is based on myths borrowed from other, earlier cultures.. There is no timeline. Its full of anachronisms and errors of geography.. Moses grew up in Pharaoh's house, but never knew his name.

The very existence of a "united kingdom" is in doubt. David's kingdom was less than 10 acres and a thousand people. The building and works attributed to Solomon were built by King Omri.

This stuff is MPORTANT.

The expected Jewish messiah was an anointed warrior king who would vanquish their enemies.

What is important is, as I said earlier, that if the history of the Old Testament is not true, then there is no value in Christianity. No value in Jesus Christ.

Thus my wonder at your 'christian' label.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[sooda]

And if there is no Hell, there is not Heaven. And if there is no Heaven there is no God. And if, and if, and if...... If the person of satan is not believed by some in Judaism, is up to them. It doesn't change that he is there in the Old Testament. See him as the 'Adversary' in the book of Job. (Job 1:6-12) (The TANAKH, The Jewish Publication Society, 1985, p. 1339)

No, I don't think it is arrogant. One need only to follow their history as told in the Old Testament. They constantly killed the prophets and rebelled against God. Their condition in the world today is due to their rejection of God and His messengers. They are scattered all over the world. They have no Temple, no sacrifice. One need only believe their Old Testament.

I do wish you would give the verses when you say Jesus said this or that. I say that because there may be more than one place that it is said, and it's good to know which you are addressing to get the context right.

Concerning Paul, 'totally opposite message' is not the complete story. Paul's message continued the 'faith' that was established by God for salvation in the Old Testament, as Jesus Christ was the fulfillment of the 'Seed' promises in the Old Testament, upon which that faith is based.

Christ came first offering Himself to Israel as their Messiah and to bring in the Kingdom as promised in the Old Testament. This was all Old Testament ground. It was not Church doctrine by any stretch. Israel would not have it or Him. Thus the rejection, crucifixion, resurrection.

During the time of Christ's rejection, the Church is being formed. But the message the resurrected Christ gave to Paul is certainly different than that which He spoke to Israel. He came to Israel as Messiah and King, ready to receive the Kingdom. But, at present during the rejection, He comes as the Saviour of all in building His Church.

My point being: both are the messages of Christ.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Herod Antipas had no beef with Jesus of Galilee and would not have been in Jerusalem if not for Passover.

When you make the distinction between Israel and Judea the Bible becomes clearer.

 

[wizanda]

Christianity is based on Jesus Christ Who came both as Israel's Messiah, and the Saviour of mankind. It did not move from the revelation in the Old Testament to the New. It was a continuance and partial fulfilling of the revelation found in the Old Testament.

Yes, the books of Paul, and the Gospels are part of that revelation.

Christianity was first established in Antioch to Paul & Simon the stumbling stone's (peter's) misunderstandings/Ministry (Acts 11:25-26).

James the Just, Head of the Church of Jerusalem, and leader of the Ebionites (Poor Ones - Zechariah 11:11) stood against Paul directly, and we can see this in the Book of James, where he challenges Paul over Abraham with Works.

We're missing the understanding from the Bible, how James 5:6, Jude 1:10, etc, are standing against the Pharisaic arguments of 'jesus' as a human Sacrifice, as not being Kosher under Jewish Law.

Yeshua established 'Followers of The Way', like Eastern Religions follow; where then Pharisaic Judaism ended this, creating Christianity (John, Paul, and Simon).

In my opinion.

 

[metis]

Most of the OT is based on myths borrowed from other, earlier cultures.. There is no timeline. Its full of anachronisms and errors of geography.. Moses grew up in Pharaoh's house, but never knew his name.

The very existence of a "united kingdom" is in doubt. David's kingdom was less than 10 acres and a thousand people. The building and works attributed to Solomon were built by King Omri.

This stuff is MPORTANT.

The expected Jewish messiah was an anointed warrior king who would vanquish their enemies.

In "reality", thus my not just playing devil's advocate here at RF, I prefer looking at pretty much everything in the Bible and all other scriptures as being allegorical for the reason that there is little that may be labeled a slam-dunk historical fact.

For example, did Moses even actually exist as a real historical figure? IMO, I don't know, but the legend of Moses does carry meaning.

 

[sooda]

In "reality", thus my not just playing devil's advocate here at RF, I prefer looking at pretty much everything in the Bible and all other scriptures as being allegorical for the reason that there is little that may be labeled a slam-dunk historical fact.

For example, did Moses even actually exist as a real historical figure? IMO, I don't know, but the legend of Moses does carry meaning.

Moses and Abraham probably didn't exist and Joshua was created as a national hero, but the Hebrews never had any large armies.. Canaanite cities were prosperous and uninterrupted .. and paid tribute to Pharaoh.

Hard to claim it was the land of milk and honey because it was hardscrabble arid and stony .. Especially in the south around Jerusalem.

Allegorical or didactic literature. The message is important, but it was never intended as history or science.