Is the Jesus in the Quran the same in the Bible?

[leibowde84]

Peace be on all.
Jesus was a person from God mentioned in Bible and Quran.
Quran is unique in making explicit claim of having divine protection.
Various aspects about Jesus (on whom be peace) according to Ahmadiyya-Muslim understanding of Quran and Bible:

Birth of Jesus
Divinity of Jesus
Mission of Jesus
Miracles of Jesus
Crucifixion of Jesus
Migration to the East

mentioned in useful links
Jesus Son of Mary: Islamic Beliefs
JESUS - PROPHET OF GOD

How can you claim that "the Quran is unique in making explicit claaims of haaving divine protection when the Gospels make the same claim (or at least very similar one). Also, why would a book's claim about its own divinity convince anyone. Any book attempting to get people to associate it with God would make this claim. So many other texts have made this exact claim and have been proven to be false. So, what makes the Quran special in this regard?

 

[outhouse]

. I believe that a Trinity is not the best explanation for the happenings in the new testament.

That may be true. But its not your faith.

I can just as easily find flaws in your faith if I had chosen to do so.

ALL Faith is not always logical or within reason, and you pointing out that in someone else's religion is not getting to the heart of the matter here, as your throwing rocks in a glass house.

So right there is a glaring error in the Qur'an

And again, your only asking for your own faith to be placed under observation.

. It is more possible, that people din't understand the Bible, and YHWH corrected them

But that is possible unsubstantiated rhetoric.

History shows us that the bible as written was the source of this later religions theology and mythology.

 

[raph]

I didnt say that there is an error in the Quran, i dont know how to quote yet

So how is it relevent to the question if later books copied the bible? I just pointed out that Jesus is the Word of God, and spirit of God in the Quran and in the Bible. Many people dont recognize this.
And I said that Muhammad was not preaching a different Jesus but he has corrected misunderstandings about him. I know they this might hurt christians, but thats what the Quran says. You dont need to believe this. But note that Jesus did the same thing. He corrected mimisconceptions the jews had about their own faith.

I encourage everyone to observe my faith. Its cool

 

[outhouse]

i dont know how to quote yet

Highlight the text in blue by holding your left mouse button down while scrolling over text.

Then a message will pop up asking if you want to quote the highlighted message, click yes.

 

[outhouse]

I just pointed out that Jesus is the Word of God, and spirit of God in the Quran and in the Bible.

Call it what you will, but because the text are different and contradict each other dramatically, that leaves us with only a few possibilities.

Either A is correct or B is correct.

Or neither is correct and man wrote them based on his faith.

 

[outhouse]

So how is it relevent to the question if later books copied the bible?

Because that later book has no real historical value. It is only using the first set of books as its only source.


When looking at things historically speaking, closer to the source or event gives a greater chance for accuracy.


Could you describe events from 600 years ago with any detail unless you read a book? or were told by people who read said books?

 

[raph]

Call it what you will, but because the text are different and contradict each other dramatically, that leaves us with only a few possibilities.

Either A is correct or B is correct.

Or neither is correct and man wrote them based on his faith.

Not necessarily, you said yourself, that religion is not always logical. What is a contradiction? Are these contradictions:
1. I drove my car / I drove my Ferrari
2. God is goodness / God is love
3. After death you will burn in fire / After death you will be miserable / After death God will punish you
4. I am moving at 0 mph / I am moving at 1000 mph
5. Jesus is a human / Jesus is God
?

See, contradictions are always relative to a certain "threshold" someone is willing to accept. Note, that the Quran and much of the Bible is poetry. Like in all other poetry the meaning is not literall. And anyway, how can you judge so fast, if one explanation of the unexplainable is better then another one?

Even two statements like "I feel bad" and "I feel good" can have the exact same meaning, if in the right context.

1. A person is 100% Happy, one hour later he is 50% happy, he says "I feel bad"
2. A person is 0% Happy, one hour later he is 50% happy, he says "I feel good"

Both described the same state of happiness completely contradictionary

Could you describe events from 600 years ago with any detail unless you read a book? or were told by people who read said books?

No, but if you accept, that God gives messages, like Christians and Muslims do, it is possible for someone to have such knowledge.

 

[Shad]

Given that the Gospels may have been edited and added to by later people like Paul, its hard to know with any certainty just exactly what Jesus taught about being God or not God, certainly in most of the Gospels Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man, not God. I tend to believe that most of the Gospels were fairly accurate and a few suspicious texts added later, and guess what, its those few suspicious texts that are used as proof texts by most Christians, and all the rest of the text which seems to contradict those proof texts, ignored.

Of course there are variation but you are cherry picking sources to make your presupposition. This is called confirmation bias, nothing more. Do you hold the same standard for Islam and the Quran? I doubt you do otherwise you would known about stories which were plagerized such as Jesus and the Palm tree and the Alexander Romance

 

[Lyndon]

Given that they didn't have tape recorders back then, I highly doubt there is any 100% accurate recording of Jesus' words from any source, in the Bible or apocryphal.

I would hardly call the Koran plagiarized because it uses stories about Jesus from different sources than the Biblical gospels. Was Jesus plagiarizing Isaiah when he quoted him?? etc etc

 

[outhouse]

Not necessarily

You perverted what I said to fit your theological needs. You completely ignored the contradictions that are in context different.


You only pointed out some examples, that factually do not cover all of the MAJOR differences in the two descriptions.

One describes the color Blue, and the other Orange. You cannot reconcile these contradictions.

 

[Shad]

Given that they didn't have tape recorders back then, I highly doubt there is any 100% accurate recording of Jesus' words from any source, in the Bible or apocryphal.

I would hardly call the Koran plagiarized because it uses stories about Jesus from different sources than the Biblical gospels. Was Jesus plagiarizing Isaiah when he quoted him?? etc etc

Apply this logic to the Quran and you will see exactly how non-Muslim view the Quran. I doubt you will as you only put such argument forward in defense of your view never in an evaluation of your views

The sources for Jesus are found in obscure Gnostic sources put together as a unified narrative which was never the case prior to Islam. The Palm Tree and Jesus predates Islam by centuries but was never part of other gnostic ideas. The Quran never mentions this fact, never mentions others already knew of the story. This is plagiarism. It is also cherry picking.

 

[Lyndon]

Sorry but plagiarism didn't exist in 650AD, its a relatively new concept.

 

[leibowde84]

Sorry but plagiarism didn't exist in 650AD, its a relatively new concept.

The idea and term were created in the 1st Century AD. Is that what you meant by "relatively new"?

In the 1st century, the use of the Latin word plagiarius (literally kidnapper) to denote stealing someone else's work was pioneered by Roman poet Martial, who complained that another poet had "kidnapped his verses." "Plagiary". (Plagiarism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[leibowde84]

Sorry but plagiarism didn't exist in 650AD, its a relatively new concept.

It actually did exist in 650AD. Just takes a quick Google search to see that it was created in the Roman Empire during the 1st Century by a poet by the name of Martial.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Apply this logic to the Quran and you will see exactly how non-Muslim view the Quran. I doubt you will as you only put such argument forward in defense of your view never in an evaluation of your views

The sources for Jesus are found in obscure Gnostic sources put together as a unified narrative which was never the case prior to Islam. The Palm Tree and Jesus predates Islam by centuries but was never part of other gnostic ideas. The Quran never mentions this fact, never mentions others already knew of the story. This is plagiarism.

Yeah, the problem is that Islam tries to elements of Judaism and Christianity and smash it into shape to fit its theology and it's pretty ill-fitting. Not to mention that it's based in misconceptions, such as the incorrect concept of the Trinity that the Qur'an has. Seems that Muslims beat Protestants in being first to charge Christians of "Mary worship", and both are based on the same misunderstandings.

 

[Lyndon]

So you can't write anything about the life and teachings of Jesus with out plagiarizing, I don't think so. The Gospels themselves we have date from manuscripts around 400AD that were "plagiarized" from older documents like the Q document, as many scholars suppose.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

So you can't write anything about the life and teachings of Jesus with out plagiarizing, I don't think so. The Gospels themselves we have date from manuscripts around 400AD that were "plagiarized" from older documents like the Q document, as many scholars suppose.

Provide evidence for that claim.

 

[Shad]

So you can't write anything about the life and teachings of Jesus with out plagiarizing, I don't think so. The Gospels themselves we have date from manuscripts around 400AD that were "plagiarized" from older documents like the Q document, as many scholars suppose.

Plagiarism is when an author put forward an idea as their own. This is the case of the Quran as it never mentions any source or author which held such a view. The same can be leveled at the Gospels. However the key difference here is we do not have the Q source while we do have sources for ideas within the Quran. We can directly point out cases of plagiarism which I have with my Jesus and the Palm Tree source linked on page 2.

 

[Shad]

Sorry but plagiarism didn't exist in 650AD, its a relatively new concept.

Yet many author's were clearly aware of citing sources prior to 650ad. The biography of Caesar mentions and cites the Gallic Wars journals. It does not present these journals as the author's own ideas. Also you own comment clearly demonstrates this when you mentioning the quoting of Isiah. A quote is a way one avoid plagiarism. You argument is inconsistent and contradictory with your previous arguments.

Plagiarism as a term did not exist, it does not mean it never happened prior to the advent of the term. Look at the wiki source. Look at how the term was created. It was created when someone had already stole the work of another and presented it as their own. So the act still existed regardless of a lack of a definition. Beside there was another term, theft.

 

[Lyndon]

Mohammad never claimed he wrote the stories about Jesus, in fact Islamic scholars seem to be in agreement that they came from earlier sources, its no more plagiarism that the Bible is. Either both the Bible and the Koran plagiarized or neither did. I sincerely doubt either the writers of the Bible or the Koran had ever heard of the concept of plagiarism as per your Roman poet.