The church discipleship group which I
attended yesterday was going through a comparative religious study on Islam.
The focus of the study was on Islam’s understanding of the resurrection of
Christ.
The differences highlighted by the
discipleship group leader about Islam in regards to Jesus Christ is that Islam
teaches in the Qur’an that Jesus is only a prophet and not divine, and that Jesus
was not crucified, but it was merely made to appear so, while Allah raised
Jesus to heaven.
The material that the discipleship group
leader had prepared then went on to the question on whether the Bible or the
Qur’an was more reliable. The answer given was that the Bible was more reliable
because it was written down within the first generation of the events recorded,
while the eyewitnesses were still alive, as compared to the Qur’an, written
over 600 years after the events with no independent, historical source of information.
An excerpt from William Lane Craig’s article “Who is the Real Jesus : The Jesus
of the Bible or The Jesus of the Qur’an?” was presented in the material, which
states that “In fact, the Qur’an contains demonstrably legendary stories about
Jesus which evolved during the centuries after his death….For example, the Qur’an
mentions the story – borrowed from the legendary forgery entitled The Infancy Gospel of Thomas – of how
the boy Jesus made a bird out of clay and then made it come to life. Such
stories are fictional.”
The material also cites historical
evidences other than the bible which corroborates with the account of Jesus
crucifixion, such as the Jewish historian Josephus reference to Jesus’
condemnation to the cross by Pilate in Testimonium
Flavianum, Roman senator and historian Tacitus reference to Jesus in his Annals, and Greek satirist Lucian’s
scornful remark of Christ in The Death of
Peregrine. One objection that I have heard raised by counter-apologists is
whether these other sources qualify as independent attestations of the gospel
narrative, since they were written decades after the crucifixion, and might
have been derived from the same sources used for the gospels
The session also discusses about the
understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity. Islam rejects the Christian
belief of God as existing in three persons. The material attempts to explain
the idea of the Trinity with William Lane Craig’s description of God as a soul
endowed with three complete sets of rational cognitive faculties, each
sufficient for personhood. The discipleship group leader tried to explain this
using the analogy of three different people in a company holding the similar
position of CEO and being able to sign off with such a title. Another member in
the discipleship group attempted to explain the idea of the trinity with an
analogy of different descriptions given of a three-dimensional object from
different perspectives. According to her, there exists a fourth dimension not
comprehensible by human mind where God can exist in separate rational forms but
maintain the same essence. Another discipleship group member casually cites the
example of someone with the mental illness of bipolar, where two separate
personalities exists in the same person, much like the story of Jerkyll and
Hyde. For me, I find it easier to understand the idea of the Trinity as simply
one rational faculty controlling three persons, much like how a puppet master
controls multiple puppets, although I reckon that such an idea of the trinity
would run into problems explaining why Jesus would admit not having knowledge
that belongs to God the Father, or why Jesus had to pray to God. Considering
such difficulties of conceiving the idea of the Trinity, I can understand why
Islam would reject this idea and why some Muslims would even label this as
polytheistic.
1 comment:
To answer your question:
I wonder whether such a pluralistic theology explaining Judaism and Christianity as being God’s different ways of reaching out to different people can also encompass Islam.
Regarding Judaism and Christianity, the Bible clearly explains:
(**Galations 4 tells us that Christianity is the new convenant, where Judaism is the Old convenant, tracing back to His promise to Abraham.)
**Galation 4:
24 These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai[Judaism's roots] and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother [Sarah]. 28 Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now.
30 But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.” 31 Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are not children of the slave woman[Hagar], but of the free woman[Sarah].
In other words, Judaism is an old "contract" God had with mankind (non-Jews like Ruth & Rahab were also accepted, as they were part of Jesus' genealogy(Matt1:5)).
Heb 10:1 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come and not the very image of those things, can never, with those sacrifices which they offered continually year by year, make those who come unto it perfect.
However, when Jesus came as THE perfect sacrifice, made once and for all upon the cross(Heb 10:12a, 18) for all mankind(John 3:16), God change it to a new "contract" with mankind.
For God said in Jeremiah 31:33 (NLT ):
"But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day," says the LORD. "I will put my laws in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts[through the Holy Spirit]. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
===========
Regarding what the Jewish law professor said, how then does he explain God's promise of a Prophet from amongst Jewish brethren:
DEUT 18.18-19 (NKJV) I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him. And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him.
===========
Regarding Islam, you may refer:
http://www.islamawareness.net/Christianity/what_does_quran.html
An extract:
Muslims believe that Jesus according to the Holy Quran is a wonderful, humble, generous messenger of God who came down and revealed God's words to his people, the people of Israel. Muslims do not believe that Jesus is God, nor they believe that God ever chose to come down to earth in a form of a man to die for our sins to purify us and forgive us.
According to Islam, Jesus never died on the cross, nor ever wanted to die on the cross, nor ever was born to die on the cross. Muslims believe that Jesus was sentenced to death, and people thought that he got executed on the cross. ... Quranic teaching is that Christ was not crucified nor killed by the Jews ... and that he was taken up to Allah Almighty.
1John 4:2 clearly states that:
By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, 3 and every spirit that DOES NOT confess that[a] Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God.
Watch his testimony video: http://naeemfazal.com/about/
These are the differences between the great monotheistic beliefs of the World.
Have you drawn your any conclusion?
- Steve
Post a Comment