Islam's view about Jesus'crucifixion and the idea of salvation(2)

[smkolins]

Originally Posted by Bandit

this is very true smkolins. at the same time you have to remember that without the death, burial & resurrection of Jesus, we do not have Christianity & from what I can see that is where I choose to put my hope & build my foundation upon, in that I too will be raised from corruptible to incoruptible, when I leave this mortal world because of Jesus & Calvary, the same way God raised up Jesus....

We are much in agreement.

Originally Posted by Bandit

some of these topics we talk about are pointless anyway & here is why...

all, every & none, means all & every & none, until we need it to mean something different according to our belief.
the prepositions for, in, by & through, means what they mean, but in religion they tend to have a different meaning when some need them to.

Then we have the mix & match religion. Run to all ends of the earth- Mix a little this & a little that for some sicientific miracle potion & wait & see if it is really going to rain or not.

anyway, i feel the most important part of a discussion on beliefs is getting UNDERSTANDING for why people see what they see. if we can't at the least try, to do that with each other, then talking about beliefs is a big waste of time & that is when we can fall short. IMO

The idea of the confusion because of a mix of this and that is, from my point of view, rather a necessary point of view for Christians these days. Since there is no authority left among the institutions of Christianity - that there are denominations representing pretty much any stance one can take and they are irreconcilable by administrative necessity - there can be little left except for viewing the rest as confusion, whatever the rest may be. If it weren't other it would be reconsiled and it can't be reconsiled. Fortunately, this history of confusion isn't necessary, from my point of view.

Sorry it took a while to get back - but thanks.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by smkolins

We are much in agreement.



The idea of the confusion because of a mix of this and that is, from my point of view, rather a necessary point of view for Christians these days. Since there is no authority left among the institutions of Christianity - that there are denominations representing pretty much any stance one can take and they are irreconcilable by administrative necessity - there can be little left except for viewing the rest as confusion, whatever the rest may be. If it weren't other it would be reconsiled and it can't be reconsiled. Fortunately, this history of confusion isn't necessary, from my point of view.

Sorry it took a while to get back - but thanks.

i totally agree- a mix of this & a mix of that makes confusion
& the history of confusion is not necessary.

[Saltmeister]

I think it's actually interesting to see what this Muslim has to say about the Christian Gospel. No, I am not trying to think fun of him, but with all this he demonstrates sound understanding of the Gospel. His arguments are fairly accurate, but I think there are several things he should know about to understand our religion a bit better.

After all, this forum is supposed to be a place where people can learn about each other's religions. My intention is to point out some problems in his arguments and resolve some misconceptions he may have about our faith.

First, I'll start with a few comments.

Originally Posted by dailogue is the best

But if Deedat was able to prove that Jesus’ life was not taken on the cross according to the Bible, so what is the origin of this idea? Who is the real founder of this idea and why? Actually, if one looks for the real background of the idea of Jesus’ crucifixion, he will find out that Paul is the real founder of this idea.

Actually, Paul couldn't be the real founder of the idea because his epistles wouldn't have been accepted by the Early Church if they disagreed with what other Christians believed. There were also many preachers in the Early Church that came before Paul. They were persecuted by Paul because they taught that Jesus was our Saviour.

Originally Posted by dailogue is the best

As against the teaching of the Master (Jesus) that salvation only comes through keeping of the commandments (Matthew 19: 16-17).

Paul nails the law and the commandments to the cross (Colonsians 2: 14), and claims that salvation can only be obtained through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ:

"If Christ be not risen from the dead, then our preaching is vain, and your faith is also vain." (1 Corinthians 15: 14) (qtd. in Deedat, 11)

The Law brought by Moses was fulfilled by the Gospel. The Gospel's teachings provide something that the Law could not provide. The Law was a "moral code" that was intended to lead people to righteousness by controlling people's minds. It demanded conformity to its moral code. Unfortunately, it brought out the worst out of people in terms of character. The Law failed humanity.

The Law failing was not God's fault. God actually made human beings so that their behaviour came entirely from their good and evil instincts regardless of what laws or moral codes were given. This is so that nobody can be "righteous" without God first giving them the power to do so. It's also so that nobody can brag or boast about being able to follow God's Law.

Originally Posted by dailogue is the best

. . . In his letter to the Romans (5: 12), Paul says: "It was through one man that sin entered the world, and through sin death, and thus death pervaded the whole human race inasmuch as all men have sinned (qtd. in Peters, 9)." Accordingly, "It was under this story, or myth, that Christianity adopted largely under the influence of Paul in order to posit evil and thereby assume the requisities of divine redemption (Al Faruqi, 20)." Thus, from that time until now, Christians had been believing that in order to be saved, you have not to disturb yourself by making good deeds, for it is so enough to believe in Jesus’ crucifixion to be saved. No matter, how good you are, you will not be saved unless you believe in Jesus as a Saviour. . . . How their salvation is easy!! Christians do not need to follow morals and principles in their life in order to be saved. Their salvation is restricted in Jesus’ crucifixion.

Righteousness doesn't come from following moral codes. If a person has to follow a system of moral codes, it really means that that person is not really of good character. People who are of good character don't need to follow a system of moral codes because they are righteous by their nature.

This is why Christians believe what they believe.

Originally Posted by dailogue is the best

But, what does reason and logic say about that idea? Is it reasonable and logical? Of course, it is not. How can a human mind believe that a man who has killed, tortured, destroyed and done very shameful and horrible things is going to be saved at the end only because he believes in Jesus’ crucifixion?

Christ's sacrifice was a ritual that served as a signal for God to open for us "a path toward holiness and righteousness." There's more to it than that, so you would have to read the Bible more to understand why this concept we have is not as stupid as it may seem!!!! It seems bizarre, but there's more to it.

Again, it's another step to understanding our faith, which is the aim of this forum. It is not "he performed the ritual and so we are saved if we simply believe" but "he performed the ritual and if we choose to follow the path he opened for us we will be saved."

In simple terms, he opened a path for us. If we follow that path, we are saved.

Originally Posted by dailogue is the best

. . . God says: "whoever works righteousness, man or woman, and has Faith, verily, to him will We give a new life a life that is good and pure, and We will bestow on such their reward according to the best of their action (16: 97)." So, one will be saved according to his deeds, and not according to something else. Everyone is responsible for his deeds and no one will save the other.

Yes, deeds are important in the Christian Gospel, but they are not deeds from a system of moral codes. They are deeds that are intrinsic to our personality and character.

Human Nature, Good and Evil and Moral Codes
I've done a bit of reading on the Epistles, and I am hoping that it will help not only Muslims understand our beliefs a bit better but also so that Christians can too. Perhaps other non-Christians can understand it too even if they can't accept what we believe.

I'm hoping what I've read might help.

Okay, what makes a person righteous? Is it by following the laws God gives us? Not quite. God's laws are based on what we would intuitively know to be right or wrong, so it's merely confirmation of the bright and dark side of human behaviour.

In a lot of religions it's believed that the rightness or wrongness of human behaviour should be measured on so-called morals, doctrines and "principles." It's believed that if you follow these so-called systems of "morals and ethics" you are righteous. Otherwise you're corrupt.

The Gospel (by Gospel I mean New Testament), in many places says otherwise, and it's got nothing to do with a so-called Redeemer or Saviour. It's not just Paul. It teaches that human behaviour is something intrinsic or inherent in our human nature. It is so deeply ingrained in our being that our character can't be judged by a so-called "system of morals and ethics."

Human behaviour comes from instincts. Good and evil are a result of instincts. It's not just a human thing, God and the angels He created have them too. Good instincts (virtues) are things like love, patience, kindness, generosity, humility and honesty. Evil instincts (vices) are things like hatred, selfishness, arrogance, greed, lust and deceit. The instincts we follow are part of our character.

human nature => instincts => vices/virtures => morality/immorality

Good behaviour is a result of our virtues. Bad behaviour is the result of our vices. In other words, morality is the result of good instincts and immorality the result of our evil instincts.

Purely good people have only good instincts, no evil instincts. They are like heavenly angels to those around them. Purely evil people have only evil instincts, no good instincts. They are like devils and demons, destroying everything in their path. At the moment, our human nature is a mixture of good and evil.

People of good character are dominated by their good instincts. Those of bad character are dominated by their evil instincts. We all have the same instincts, but our character and personality are a result of some instincts dominating and some being dormant.

We are not just social beings but also beings motivated by sentiment, desires, passions and emotions. It is part of our natural existence.

So why don't we (Christians) believe in "moral codes?" It's because understanding and controlling our instincts are more important than following rules. It is our instincts that make us either holy, unholy, clean, unclean, righteous or corrupt. They constitute our character.

So . . . we have a good reason to believe what we believe.

Why Do We Believe in Christ?
No matter what we do we can't get rid of our evil instincts. That is, we can't get rid of our bad character. Do we have to get rid of it? Do we really need to be perfect?

Yes, we do need to get rid of these things. Our evil instincts are redundant. Useless. They destroy our lives. They serve no constructive purpose. God didn't give it to us. We've got it because Adam ate the fruit from the Forbidden Tree.

But what's God going to do? Adam was given a choice, so likewise we get a choice too. God sends Christ to perform that magnificent ritual, thereby opening for us a path to His kingdom. The only question is how to find that path and stay on it.

Path To Holiness: By Faith, Hope and Love
The Gospel of "original sin" and "redemption by Christ" isn't exactly Paul's idea. Peter, James and John talk about it too, so it's a universal concept within the Christian Gospel.

Peter talks about hope, James talks about faith and John talks about love. In his letter "James" in the NT, James talks about how faith is accompanied by deeds. Paul talks about how we must put to death our "evil instincts." Peter talks about it too. James explains how the tongue can start conflicts and fuel hatred.

Paul's message about love in 1 Corinthians 13 is accompanied by what John says about love in 1 John.

They all tell us to turn away and withdraw from the "evil instincts" while at the same time reinforcing our "good instincts." This is what brings a person to life in the Kingdom of God.

Is Jesus the Messiah and Saviour? Paul certainly upholds this view. According to Peter, "the stone the builders rejected has become the capstone." (1 Peter 2:7). 1 John 3:4-5 actually talks about how the Son of God takes away sins!!! John even says that "whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God" (1 John 5:1). They all confirm that He is Messiah and Saviour.

There's something else. They all stress the importance of faith in some form or another.

Faith, hope and love, coupled with our good instincts keeps us on the path to holiness that Christ offers. It is not righteousness by works. It is righteousness by faith, righteousness by us following our good instincts, by us having hope that we will reach God, and by love. It is righteousness by us choosing to allow God to condition us into having all these things, therefore making us holy beings.

faith + hope + love + our good instincts = synergy of righteousness

See? We don't need a moral code at all. Faith, hope and love work together to bring out the goodness God imparted into us when He created us.

What we mean by "original sin" is corruption of the human nature with "evil instincts." This is what we mean by sin. It's not the act of doing evil, but the fact that we have evil within us. The purpose of Christ is to save us from the evil, destructive forces of our evil instincts.

Conclusion: Yes, This is How It All Works
It sounds bizarre and weird for us to think this way, but actually it doesn't sound so stupid after all. All we need to do is read some Scripture, especially the epistles, and all this stuff will be clear to us all.

I think "salvation" is probably an overused word. I think sometimes we use it at the wrong places, wrong times and for the wrong reasons. When we talk about "being saved" they usually don't have a clue what we're talking about. We often don't do our homework properly. Hopefully Christians, as well as non-Christians, can finally understand this a lot better.

Anyway, I just thought I might contribute something to this thread and "add my two cents."

[inhumility]

The topic is very important but its title should have been. What is reality? Did Jesus die on cross? or he did not die on cross, he was delivered alive from cross, was treated in the room-like tomb by his close disciples, thus he survived from death, migrated to 10 tribes of the Israel and died later at some point in the history.

It is very important for bringing unity in the Abrahamic religions i.e. Jews, Christians and the Muslims or if not possible at least understanding among the three.

Importance for the Jews

It is to be investigated as to why they tried to kill Jesus/Christ or put him on the cross. Were they politically motivated or due to some personal enmity or due to religious injunctions. Since they believed in Torah or the Old Testament as named by the Christians, and the Muslims also believe in Torah to an extant. The motive and the incidence of putting Jesus on cross should therefore be discussed in the Jewish board of the Forum .Anybody could take part in the discussion but references if any should be mainly from Torah the religious book of the Jews, not from the New Testament or Quran as Jews don’t believe in these books and reference to these books will be of no significance for them. The Jews have to state as to why they (or their elders in history) tried to kill an innocent person called Jesus. They should clear off their position in this respect.

Importance for the Christians

The incident of crucifixion and the events related to it should be discussed in the Christian Board and the arguments should be primarily based with reference to the testimony of the New Testament and the historic evidences if any.Giving arguments from Quran would be of little significance for Christians unless somebody first convinces Christians of authenticity of Quran.

Importance for the Muslims

This is also very important for the Muslims. All Muslims do not believe that Jesus (or Essa) died on cross or even he was put on cross, there are different interpretations and beliefs among the Muslims based on Quran or tradition. Resolving this issue could unite the Muslims also. This should be discussed in the Muslim/Islamic Board and the arguments should be primarily from Muslim scriptures Quran and Sunnah.

So to me this should be discussed in three Boards of the Forum for clear understanding.

Yours truly
inhumility

We unite in truth, by myths and fictions we are off the path.

This would be a useful interfaith dialogue, I think.

[I, Brian]

This is one of those topics that I really should have closed at the beginning.

Although the question of the Islamic view of the life and death of Jesus can make for interesting discussion, this particular thread was continuing a rather unfortunate habit by a minority of Muslim members to push Muslim views on other religions here - an issue that has since been addressed.

I know we will address this question again later - in the meanwhile, better to close this thread and start afresh on a new discussion.