(Christians, Muslims): Why your religion?

[SA Huguenot]

I'm a former Christian who understands that Christianity, Islam and Judaism are very related. They all came from Abraham. You have to decide whether Jesus was the Messiah and whether he was God in the flesh (Christianity) or not. Then, you have to decide whether Jesus was even a prophet (Islam) or not (Judaism). There are many other things but Jesus is a major difference. If you need more info. about the other things, please let me know.

And I would like to correct you.
Islam has nothing to do with the Abrahamic religious route.
it is a religion that does not know the God if Israel at all, and is an impostor just as JW's and Mormonism is to Abrahamic religion.

 

[Dexter]

This is false and also the Christian version of Jesus is just a rip-off of Dionysus, who is more likely true as God-man than Jesus.

And I would like to correct you.
Islam has nothing to do with the Abrahamic religious route.
it is a religion that does not know the God if Israel at all, and is an impostor just as JW's and Mormonism is to Abrahamic religion.

Agreed.

 

[Unguru]

the God if Israel ......is an impostor

So are you saying that there are God's of tribes, towns and cities? like "The God of New York", "The God of England", "The God of the Soviet Union", "The God of Bloemfrontein", "The God of Washington". Your God must be very small if this is the case, your God also sounds like a diplomat rather than being.....God.

But not only that but you believe "he" INCARNATED INTO A BODY

 

[Guitar's Cry]

My opinion is as follows:

Either EVERYONE are equally God,
or God is transcendent and that is that!​

There is no "God incarnated as just ONE person", that's just silliness. Even or delusional Hindus (Vaishnavites, specifically) knew better, with their "ten incarnations of Vishnu". So Jesus is God-incarnate but not Moses and King David?

Else you stumble over at the simple idea of Prophets who are supposed to be guided by God but NOT GOD themselves.

The equation is simple and shouldn't be trampled over, in the case of Christianity. I don't think Christianity has any hope. At least Islam in it's core doctrines makes it clear that God is formless, transcendent and all-pervading, leaving no room for anthropomorphism.
Christianity and Judaism are vague, contradictory and nonsensical.

As a Sikh, if I had to choose either, it'd obviously not be Christianity. There is no chance in hell for me to ever take the Christian option.

There are those (me included) who interpret the Christ figure as one who realized his own divinity and attempted to show folks the way to realizing theirs. But, due to misinterpretation, misdirection, and the fact that authorities both political and religious really hate it when people start to develop a sense of their own worth, this message was perverted into a more worshipful approach.

 

[calm]

I believe in God, and at this point, I've decided that if I were to follow a particular religion, it would either be Christianity or Islam; these two seem most likely of all the religions I've studied to be true. Yet, I'm conflicted about which one of these is true and unable to make up my mind.

So, Christians and Muslims of RF, why should I join your respective religion and not the alternative?

"So, Christians and Muslims of RF, why should I join your respective religion and not the alternative?"

This question is of no use to you. Under Islam and under Christianity there are many different views, everyone will tell his own "truth". You believe in God, so ask God. Ask him for the Holy Spirit so that you know the truth. The Holy Spirit is the teacher, he will teach you.
But if you ask him, then under his real name YAHUAH / YAHUSHA. He will not answer you if you call him "Allah" "Jehovah" "Jesus" or "God".

The name is more important than you think.
As example "God" is just a title and not a name.
God has many titles just as a human can have many titles, but just as a human has his own name, God has his own name.
And the names Jehovah and Jesus are both wrong.

Romans 10:13
Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

 

[sealchan]

I believe in God, and at this point, I've decided that if I were to follow a particular religion, it would either be Christianity or Islam; these two seem most likely of all the religions I've studied to be true. Yet, I'm conflicted about which one of these is true and unable to make up my mind.

So, Christians and Muslims of RF, why should I join your respective religion and not the alternative?

Ask God which religion you should follow and wait for His answer. God's is always the most convincing voice.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I believe in God, and at this point, I've decided that if I were to follow a particular religion, it would either be Christianity or Islam; these two seem most likely of all the religions I've studied to be true. Yet, I'm conflicted about which one of these is true and unable to make up my mind.

So, Christians and Muslims of RF, why should I join your respective religion and not the alternative?

One major aspect by way of contrast:

* The Bible says Jesus is God, and that trusting Jesus, one receives eternal life

* The Qu'ran, talking of Jesus, specifically says Jesus is not God, and that eternal life might someday come from obedience to and submission to a monotheist God

 

[Samael_Khan]

I believe in God, and at this point, I've decided that if I were to follow a particular religion, it would either be Christianity or Islam; these two seem most likely of all the religions I've studied to be true. Yet, I'm conflicted about which one of these is true and unable to make up my mind.

So, Christians and Muslims of RF, why should I join your respective religion and not the alternative?

Christianity and Islam are not religions on their own these days. One has to decide which version of them is correct. There are loads of denominations in Christianity which vary the practice of the faith to a great degree. There is the choice of whether to be a Trinitarian or Unitarian and various other versions of the view of God. And with Islam there are Sunni, Shia and other small groups.

One route to take is to decide which text, the Bible or the Quran is true, then decide further from there.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Scheherazade

The name alone kinda makes me suspicious too

 

[Scheherazade]

One route to take is to decide which text, the Bible or the Quran is true, then decide further from there.

This is one of the main questions which keeps me from deciding. I have heard convincing arguments both for and against the textual integrity of the Bible, and at this point I don't see as feasible the common Islamic position that the Bible is absolutely corrupted beyond recognition and take a much more nuanced stance. A lot of Muslims like to cite scholars such as Bart Ehrman in support of that position, but of course such a materialistic approach to textual criticism would yield similar results when applied to the Qur'an, as it has with certain revisionist scholars. We don't have original manuscripts of the Biblical books, and we don't have the original Uthmanic recension of the Qur'an, so the question is still very unclear, at least for me right now. Also, there is the question of the qira'at (styles) of the Qur'an. Both the Hebrew Bible and the Qur'an were originally written in Semitic languages and without vowels. The vocalization of the text was transmitted through tradition. With the Bible, one vocalization was agreed upon by the rabbis, while Muslim scholars preserved 10, which are somehow all correct. So, the Bible seems to win out here, or maybe I'm mistaken.
As for the denominational question, if I were a Christian, I would either be Catholic or Orthodox, and if I was a Muslim, I would probably be Sunni (though I haven't researched as much on the Islamic side).

 

[Scheherazade]

So much ran through my mind when I read your post.
1. I saw this before on a website in South Africa, "KletsKerk". a few Muslims joined and pretended to be an Atheist, an Agnostic and a Christian.
They came up with the story that they now are studying Islam and Christianity and want to decide where they want to be, either as they are, or in a new religion. Guess what, the "Atheist" declared that the Quran gave him all the answers, the "Agnostic" said Muslims are very intelligent, and the "Christian" said the Bible is corrupt.
needless to say, with a big announcement these 3 persons declared thee Shadaha and "Turned" islam. it took me less than a week to discover that they were Muslims and were never Christian at all.
I hope you are not one of these tricksters.
2. My second thought is, why will anyone try to find out which religion to adhere too, and decide betweeen Christian and Muslim? Why not the other religions also as members asked here also? Again, I am suspicious about this thread!
3. My last thought was, How will this person go around to discover which religion is true? When I was an Atheist, I went to every religion and listened to their claims.
I then investigated these claims and when I discovered one was lying through their teeth, I kept this information, but scrapped the religion.

Obviously, as others here also asked: Which sect of Christian or Islam will this person join?

Ok, I am very pessimistic, but lets see what recipy Scheherazade uses to discover the correct religion.

That's a crazy story, but I am a true seeker, and hopefully further conversation can assure you of that.
Why Islam and Christianity? I have looked into most of the religions on the "List of religions" Wikipedia page, and after much praying and researching, my conclusion is that truth lies within the Abrahamic tradition. I have already explained why I haven't chosen Judaism, so that leaves Islam and Christianity (I know there are more than three, but I have my own reasons for rejecting the others). Both of them have their own evidences and arguments, many of which can be convincing, and both provide universal answers to the human conditions, while providing a strong moral framework, which is what I think the ideal religion would have. And I answer the denomination question in my previous post.

 

[Wasp]

This is one of the main questions which keeps me from deciding. I have heard convincing arguments both for and against the textual integrity of the Bible, and at this point I don't see as feasible the common Islamic position that the Bible is absolutely corrupted beyond recognition and take a much more nuanced stance. A lot of Muslims like to cite scholars such as Bart Ehrman in support of that position, but of course such a materialistic approach to textual criticism would yield similar results when applied to the Qur'an, as it has with certain revisionist scholars. We don't have original manuscripts of the Biblical books, and we don't have the original Uthmanic recension of the Qur'an, so the question is still very unclear, at least for me right now. Also, there is the question of the qira'at (styles) of the Qur'an. Both the Hebrew Bible and the Qur'an were originally written in Semitic languages and without vowels. The vocalization of the text was transmitted through tradition. With the Bible, one vocalization was agreed upon by the rabbis, while Muslim scholars preserved 10, which are somehow all correct. So, the Bible seems to win out here, or maybe I'm mistaken.
As for the denominational question, if I were a Christian, I would either be Catholic or Orthodox, and if I was a Muslim, I would probably be Sunni (though I haven't researched as much on the Islamic side).

But what about the contents of the books? Deciding which would be by historical evidence the more correct one isn't the only way to decide which one is true.

 

[Scheherazade]

But what about the contents of the books? Deciding which would be by historical evidence the more correct one isn't the only way to decide which one is true.

I don't know if that's a very good way of testing whether or not they're true. Obviously, the Qur'an presents the text itself, in its content and eloquence, as a miracle, but the Bible is also very eloquent and has rich teachings. This line of thinking doesn't bring us much closer to the truth.

 

[Wasp]

I don't know if that's a very good way of testing whether or not they're true. Obviously, the Qur'an presents the text itself, in its content and eloquence, as a miracle, but the Bible is also very eloquent and has rich teachings. This line of thinking doesn't bring us much closer to the truth.

I disagree.

 

[Scheherazade]

I disagree.

Can you explain why?

 

[Wasp]

Can you explain why?

Because you know so little about the Qur'an if you think the only way to verify it is that what you already described. In other words, the very proof is still waiting for you to learn it, but you think you should not try to learn it until you know it to be true. So... You're on a straight path to Christianity already. Also shows on that you seem to have neglected research regarding Islam so far.

 

[Scheherazade]

Because you know so little about the Qur'an if you think the only way to verify it is that what you already described. In other words, the very proof is still waiting for you to learn it, but you think you should not try to learn it until you know it to be true. So... You're on a straight path to Christianity already. Also shows on that you seem to have neglected research regarding Islam so far.

Then what are the other ways we can verify the Qur'an? I apologize for my ignorance.

 

[Wasp]

Then what are the other ways we can verify the Qur'an? I apologize for my ignorance.

On many many ways, but to put a few simple ones forward: scientific facts from the Qur'an which far surpass those in the bible in accuracy as well as quantity, and the lack of contradictions within the Qur'an.

 

[Samael_Khan]

This is one of the main questions which keeps me from deciding. I have heard convincing arguments both for and against the textual integrity of the Bible, and at this point I don't see as feasible the common Islamic position that the Bible is absolutely corrupted beyond recognition and take a much more nuanced stance. A lot of Muslims like to cite scholars such as Bart Ehrman in support of that position, but of course such a materialistic approach to textual criticism would yield similar results when applied to the Qur'an, as it has with certain revisionist scholars. We don't have original manuscripts of the Biblical books, and we don't have the original Uthmanic recension of the Qur'an, so the question is still very unclear, at least for me right now. Also, there is the question of the qira'at (styles) of the Qur'an. Both the Hebrew Bible and the Qur'an were originally written in Semitic languages and without vowels. The vocalization of the text was transmitted through tradition. With the Bible, one vocalization was agreed upon by the rabbis, while Muslim scholars preserved 10, which are somehow all correct. So, the Bible seems to win out here, or maybe I'm mistaken.
As for the denominational question, if I were a Christian, I would either be Catholic or Orthodox, and if I was a Muslim, I would probably be Sunni (though I haven't researched as much on the Islamic side).

The whole discussion is complex.

I personally disqualify the Quran automatically because it makes claims about the Bible that it can't back up. The Torah and Gospel that it says was brought to earth and taught by Moses and Jesus never existed as there is no evidence for it. And it shows an extreme lack of understanding of the Bible which I find having very solid themes, such as the relevance of sacrifice which the Quran seems unaware of. Plus the name of God YHWH. The references the Quran does make to Christians and the Jews come from extra biblical sources that were available at the time. The Quran would've been better off if it claimed to be a brand new religion and not try to find support from the people of the book. The whole Uthmanic recension thing is suspect. But that is just a personal opinion as I said.

The Bible is highly complex (not that the Quran isn't) and the cases that certain muslims make against it just reveals their lack of knowledge of the book as they ignore context and make absurd claims about Muhammed being in the scriptures. Textual Criticism also reveals a lot about the book and that it is a compilation of different sources, none of which confirms the muslims view of what the original text or message was.

My journey with Christianity and having been a Christian has shown that if one is to understand the Bible, they cannot do so without studying the Jewish understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures. They actually seem to have the more solid and sound interpretation of the scriptures. The NT writers seem to take certain writing out of context.

The Quran itself is difficult to understand as one must also study loads of Islamic understandings of the text that have been written over the centuries. And it is difficult to get into and I doubt that I have come across any opposer of islam who actually knows what he is talking about when it comes to Islam and the Quran in the same ways that I have found no Muslim knowing what he is talking about when it comes to the Bible. Just ask theme detailed questions about the book and they are confused.

Also, we haven't had the intense textual criticism approach and historical approach of the Quran that we have had of the Bible, so the two have been scrutinized on unequal terms and the Bible has held up pretty well, it hasn't been completely massacred. In fact it has helped us to have a better understanding of history in many cases. I don't know what would happen to the Quran if it was examined in the same way.

Why would you choose Catholic and Orthodox vs the others? And why would you choose Sunni over Shia and others?

I think that among the Abrahamic religions, Judaism is the religion that is truest to the understanding of the Old Testament, which means that the other two would be disqualified.

 

[Samael_Khan]

1. I saw this before on a website in South Africa, "KletsKerk". a few Muslims joined and pretended to be an Atheist, an Agnostic and a Christian.
They came up with the story that they now are studying Islam and Christianity and want to decide where they want to be, either as they are, or in a new religion. Guess what, the "Atheist" declared that the Quran gave him all the answers, the "Agnostic" said Muslims are very intelligent, and the "Christian" said the Bible is corrupt.
needless to say, with a big announcement these 3 persons declared thee Shadaha and "Turned" islam. it took me less than a week to discover that they were Muslims and were never Christian at all.
I hope you are not one of these tricksters.

I have seen some of these deceptions on the net before. They are pretty ridiculous.

If you come to Cape Town you should hang out in Bokaap and the CBD and chat to muslims. It is interesting. When I used to go out in the ministry a sunni muslim guy walked up to me and another JW brother and started chatting. And in typical Salafi dawah fashion he spoke a lot and listened too little. He kept on with the typical script, trying to deceive us by taking biblical verses out of context. He asked if I knew who the comforter was and then said the comforter was Muhammed. I was like "OK, so the apostles knew Muhammed and Jesus sent him to earth then"? The guy shut up. We knew too much.

A sign of a weak argument and desperation is when one has to deceive others to get them to agree with you.