Christianity and Islam

[BetheButterfly]

We had a few followups to that in which you artfully dodged just about every question I asked.

 

Could you please show me? Thank you. I have tried to answer the questions you asked me. I don't think you have answered every question that I have asked you, by the way. Let me go check.

 

Well, they kind of have to because the OT is pretty difficult to justify and mesh with the New. But they have developed all sorts of mental gymnastics to assist with that, some of which are on display here.

Again, you can be as rude and condescending as you like and take personal jabs at me however you want. I still love you because of Jesus' teachings.

So you say that you don't base this on their actions (which include killing all the way up to systematic genocide), but based on Jesus' teachings and example. But that example (which, if I pressed, you would say is based on love, including for one's enemies) has absolutely no room for the kind of violence attributed to many of the OT "prophets". They didn't follow the teachings he outlined, and didn't live up to his example.

That is why Jesus makes the difference. The Hebrew and Jewish prophets before Jesus did not need to follow Jesus' teachings because guess what? He hadn't taught those teachings yet. That is why in David's Psalms, you will find David passionately stating how he hates certain people (Psalm 31:6, Psalm 139:21). Now, was David alive on earth when Jesus taught his followers to love their enemies? Nope. Who were alive on earth when Jesus was teaching his followers? His followers. Was Muhammad before Jesus time or after? After. Was he a follower of Jesus? Well, he said that Jesus was a prophet, but did he follow Jesus' command to love his enemies even when he had the military might to kill or expel them? Nope.

 

Did Jesus tell his followers to kill or expel those who didn't believe in him? Nope. He told them to love their neighbors and their enemies, and both groups (neighbors and enemies) included people who didn't believe his claims!

 

And you've cited this violence and flat out contradiction of Jesus' teachings as a reason why you consider Muhommad (among others) to be false prophets. Yet their actions and their clashing with Jesus' teachings are about the same.

Again, Moses and King David were before Jesus' teachings, whereas Muhammad (after Jesus' teachings) said that Jesus was a prophet yet contradicted Jesus' teachings as well as Jesus' example.

 

You have no internally consistent reasoning for how you reach these conclusions. You just go into this utter abyss of moral relativism to excuse or justify atrocities committed by people of your own book, but hang others out to dry for far lesser crimes.

Thank you for insulting/judging/mocking me and my beliefs. I am learning through discussing with you about what Jesus said:

 

Mat 5 NIV - Introduction to the Sermon on the Mount - Bible Gateway

"Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me."

 

I am curious. Do you believe in Allah and Muhammad as the last prophet? If not, why are you attacking my beliefs and me concerning what I believe about Muhammad, due to the Qur'an and hadiths in comparision to Jesus' teachings accounted in the Bible and the lives of Jesus' followers? Do I attack you because you are not a Christian? Do I say that people who are not Christian just "go into this moral abyss" of whatever? That is not very nice of you to do that to me. However again, I am learning about Jesus' teaching in Matthew 5 concerning being blessed when insulted.

 

What do you believe about Muhammad and the Qur'an? I would greatly appreciate you answering my questions.

 

 

But you've managed to convince yourself that genocide, so long as it occurs before Jesus came along and told us to play nice, is okay.

I never said it was ok. I did say I have trouble with the killings accounted in the Tanakh. However, it is interesting how many times you have stated I think or wrote something I did not. That's not very nice.

So, tell me, simply, without obfuscation, are you a moral relativist?

No. My morality is based on Jesus and thus is not relative. If Jesus were, by the way, a proponent of killing/hating enemies and a military leader, than I would not base my morality on him nor would I be his follower.

Now since you asked me that, are you a moral relativist? What do you base your morality on?

 

I was not being rude. Trying to hijack the discussion with off-topic ravings is rude.

As the thread-starter, I think it is interesting when people ask questions and politely give their opinions. If he asked questions or gave his opinion rudely, then that would be rude. However, I don't see his posts to be "off-topic ravings." It seems that when people have a negative mindset as to what other people think and ask, they consider other peoples' thoughts/questions as "ravings" which is very sad. Edited February 27, 2013 by BetheButterfly

[BetheButterfly]

Why do you keep on bringing up completely irrelevant tangents? Please just stay on topic for once. This has nothing to do with anything.

 

I am not bringing up "irrelevant tangents" but rather asking a question to show that just as Moses who believed in G-d killed an Egyptian beating a slave, so it is possible for Atheists to kill someone who is hurting another person.

 

My question and answer: "Why do some Atheists who are in the army kill??? I am sure some Atheists have killed people who are hurting others in order to try to save those being hurt too" shows that just as Moses had a reason to kill the Egyptian person who was beating a Hebrew slave, so there are Atheists who kill people who are hurting others in order to try to save those being hurt too. Or, are there no Atheists who kill others in order to try to save people who are in danger/being hurt?

 

My point was that it definitely does not mean that, under an absolute moral standard, actions can be moral before he came and immoral afterwards, or vice versa. I think I stated myself pretty clearly.

I never said that the actions of killing was moral before Jesus, which is why I have trouble with the killings by humans of humans accounted in the Tanakh, but what I am saying is that when Jesus said to love one's enemies, that doesn't mean to kill them. Because Muhammad killed and expelled enemies, it shows he is not obeying Jesus' commands to love.

 

 

In response to me asking you whether you think morality is absolute or relative? What the?

I am sorry that it bothered you that I asked you questions in response to your question. You ask me questions about what I believe, so why can I not ask you questions about what you believe/don't believe?

 

Morality is basically following rules of conduct. Much of this morality depends on the culture. That is why the moral code of many Muslims in the Middle East is for example different than the moral code of Christians in the USA. For example, in the moral code of many Muslims in the Middle East, women are to be veiled/covered, whereas in the moral code of most Christians in the USA, no veil/whole body covering is necessary.

 

So in the cultural sense, morality is "relative" depending on the teachings/customs of the people who follow a moral code. However, people who follow Jesus focus their moral code (or morality) on Jesus' teachings and example. According to Jesus' teachings, loving one's enemies is part of the moral code.

 

Now, since I answered your question, please answer the following questions: Thanks.

 

Do you think morality is relative?

Do you think Atheists never murder?

Do you think Atheists never rationalize killing?

 

 

Do you think morality is relative, or is your god the sole and final authority?

I think morality or moral codes depend on the people group. As a Christian, my morality/moral code focuses on Jesus' teachings and example.

Christianity is pretty clear on this, yet you seem to be trying to rationalise murder committed by your prophets.

Jesus did not teach to love one's enemies during the time of Moses and David. Why? Jesus did not live (as a human on earth) during the time of Moses or of David and hence they did not know Jesus' teachings to love one's enemies. Now, if Jesus had been born during Moses or David's time on earth and told them to love their enemies, it is possible that they would have done so.

Now, why do some Atheists kill other people?

 

 

So Israeli prophets can kill, but gentiles can't? You have got to be freaking kidding me.

Where in the world did I write the above? Many people have the capacity/abilty to kill, whether they are prophets or not.

You are obviously not interested in having an actual discussion, and you are not even giving me the basic respect of responding to what I'm saying. I am terminating this discussion with you right now.

I am sorry you thought my post(s?) was/were disrespectful. I have responded to your posts although I feel that you nit-pick at what I write, personally jab at me, and disrespect my beliefs and me. If you have no desire to discuss with me, I respect that and I'm sorry if you thought I was being disrespectful to you. It was not my intention. I do think you are being very disrespectful to me and to my belief. However, this is a great lesson to me concerning loving those who insult me and my belief (which is based on Jesus' teachings and life).

 

Blessings. I have to go now because my husband is here and we are going to the gym to work out! Peace and love

 

P.S. Even though you disagree with my beliefs, that's ok. I respect your right to not agree with me. I am so thankful for freedom of religion and for people (including you and Atheists and Muslims and people of other beliefs) having the right to not believe what I believe, as well as for other Christians and me to believe what we believe, which includes the belief in Jesus being the Messiah, the Son of God. Christians also do not believe that Muhammad is a true prophet; otherwise we would not be Christians but rather Muslims (followers of Muhammad). Even though Muslims disagree with us, Christians throughout the centuries have not believed Muhammad's claims because they contradict Jesus' teachings and example.

Edited February 27, 2013 by BetheButterfly

[soccerrprp]

Christ is the Son of Jehovah, God of the Old Tesrament who declared "eye for an eye". Christ taught to turn the other cheek, yes, but we will see the "eye for an eye" when he returns to judge those who aren't covered by his blood atonement.

 

As a fellow Christian, does it give you comfort to believe that Jesus will return to do what he preaches we should not? In other words, your god is a hypocrite, hateful, vicious, unforgiving....

 

For those of us who know better, your brand of belief reveals that you are not a follower of Jesus Christ.

[BetheButterfly]

It is irrelevant. What atheists do or do not do has nothing whatsoever to do with the apparent conflict I saw in what you were saying regarding Muhammad not being a true prophet because he fought wars and killed people, and many of the OT prophets doing the same. This isn't even a question about what is moral or justifiable, it's about why you disqualify one person for their actions but not others.

 

In polite discussions between people of different beliefs and people who do not believe in God, it is fine and relevant to address all of the ideologies of the people discussing. Since you are an Atheist I assume, it is fine for me to ask questions about Atheists same as it is fine for you to ask me questions concerning Christians.

 

Moses was not a Christian. Why? Christ hadn't come yet!

 

Comparing Moses' actions to what an Atheist would possibly do in the same situation is fine, especially since Moses did not hear Jesus' teachings to love one's enemies (since Jesus hadn't come yet) and many Atheists do not ascribe to Jesus' teachings to love one's enemies. Now, even though Muhammad believed in God, he did not ascribe to Jesus' teaching of loving one's enemies once he had the power to defeat his enemies. While Muhammad did not live during Jesus' time, he did live afterwards, whereas Moses did not live during or after Jesus' time.

 

Just as Atheists do not tend to base their code of conduct (morality) on Jesus Christ and his teachings, so Muhammad also did not. This is one of the reasons why Christians believe that Muhammad is a false prophet. Again, if we believed that he was a true prophet, we would be Muslims = followers of Muhammad, instead of Christians.

Because instead of answering the question I asked, you responded with a totally irrelevant question of your own. You seriously don't see why that is annoying?

I have answered many of your questions with statements instead of questions. However, since it annoys you that I ask you questions in response to some of your many questions, I apologize and won't do it again. One thing my husband told me when we were on our way to the gym yesterday evening is that some Atheists simply like to provoke. I don't know if you honestly are interested in a polite dialogue/discussion in order to understand the differences in beliefs in God, or if you are simply trying to provoke me. Regardless, I still love you and consider you a brother in humanity, even though you do not agree with me concerning my Heavenly Father and my Redeemer Jesus Christ.

Yes. No. No. Although the last two questions are clearly loaded, because you surely could not possibly believe that I or anyone could think otherwise.

It's interesting what people think. Since I don't know you, the only thing I know about you is how you conduct yourself on this forum. Now, just like Atheists are people who rationalize what they do or believe/don't believe, so people who believe in God rationalize what they believe too. Since I don't know if you think Atheists are "perfect", that is why I asked these questions.

 

As for Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, they lived at different times. Moses did not hear Jesus' teachings about loving one's enemies because Jesus hadn't taught them yet. Therefore, he is not responsible to follow Jesus' teaching of loving one's enemies, is he? Let's say a parent didn't tell a child to not draw on the walls. If the child draws on the wall and yet the parent hadn't said not to, is it fair for the parent to scold the child? No. Why? Because before a consequence to the rule is given, the rule needs to be given first.

For Christians, the rule to love one's enemies began when Jesus taught it.

 

Muhammad came after Jesus' time. Because of this and because he claimed to be a prophet like Jesus, (and even "greater" as the "Final Messenger" which is not a Biblical teaching by the way), Muhammad did not follow Jesus' teachings and example once he had the power/ability to conquer his enemies. Love does not kill or expel people.

 

Rather, Jesus made it clear what loving one's enemies means:

 

Luke 6 NIV - Jesus Is Lord of the Sabbath - One - Bible Gateway

"27 “...do good to those who hate you...bless those who curse you,

 

pray for those who mistreat you.

 

 

29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them.

 

 

30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.

 

 

31Do to others as you would have them do to you."

 

 

Now, I strongly doubt that Muhammad would have appreciated being a slave and his wives and daughter being enslaved or possessed by the right hand of anybody, yet he enslaved his enemies or killed them or expelled them or demanded a bribe. Is that loving them or doing to them what he would want others to do to him? Nope.

 

 

 

 

Right, so contrary to what you said earlier, you are a relativist. This is starting to get really difficult for me to follow at this point, as this is the 3rd or 4th time you've said completely opposite things at different times.

I understand that not all people follow Jesus' teachings and example. Obviously, Muhammad did not. Now, I do think that people's moral codes/morality/morals are different based on the teachings and traditions they follow. For example, I do not follow the Islamic morality. How do I not follow Islamic morality? First of all, I don't wear a veil or covering even though I'm modest in my culture, whereas women who follow the moral code ascribed for them in the Qur'an do:

 

Qur'an 24:31 (Yusuf Ali) I boldened some:

24. Light

 

"And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss. "

 

Does this mean that I am a relativist because I do not follow the moral code of Islam ascribed in the Qur'an? No. It merely means that I understand that not all people base their moral codes on the same teachings that I do. I do not base my morals on the Qur'an, but rather absolutely on the teachings of Jesus Christ. That is why Muhammad is not to me a moral person, because he did not follow the moral code of Jesus Christ. I am not a relativist because I believe Jesus' moral code is absolutely true whereas I do not believe Muhammad's moral code is truly moral.

 

As for Atheists' moral codes, those that come closest to Jesus' moral code are the ones I admire the most. For example, even though Atheists do not believe in many of Jesus' teachings, some have understood the importance of not fighting/killing/hating people different than them. This to me is following Jesus' moral code in the sense of loving one's enemies.

 

If I have to point out why this is irrelevant again, I might possibly lose my mind.

I am sorry to hear that. While you might think it's irrelevant, I don't. Since we are discussed why Moses killed the Egyptian who was beating a Hebrew slave and discussed Muhammad killing some enemies and expelling others and exacting a fine/bribe for others, as well as people who call themselves "Christians" who disobey Jesus' teachings to love one's enemies (like in the Crusades, Inquisition, witch hunts, burning of "heretics" and so forth), it is also fine to discuss why some Atheists kill.

 

Please answer my question. Why do some Atheists kill?

 

What? I am truly speechless at this. You were, by all outward appearances, saying that it was okay/excusable/justifiable/whatever for Moses to kill, because he was an Israelite, but not okay for Muhammad, because he wasn't. What I was saying was so obviously not regarding the capaicity to kill, and you surely know it. I cannot believe that anybody could miss the obvious meaning of the question. So why the run-around?

Again, Moses did not hear Jesus' teachings to love one's enemies because Jesus hadn't taught them yet. Muhammad lived after Jesus' teachings and although he said he is a prophet like Moses, David, and Jesus, he didn't follow Jesus' command to love his enemies.

 

As for Muhammad not being an Israelite, it is important to note that the prophesy concerning a prophet like Moses (found in Deuteronomy 18) has the requirement of being a brother Israelite.

 

Actually, forget it. I don't have the patience for this. I am going to invoke the law of diminishing returns and bow out, possibly for good.

In order to discuss with people of different beliefs, it is important to be patient and kind when disagreeing. Since you do not seem to have the patience or kindness to talk with people who believe differently than you, then it might benefit you to not engage in discussions with people whose beliefs you do not respect and with people for whom you do not have patience or kindness.

 

Peace and love

Edited February 28, 2013 by BetheButterfly

[BetheButterfly]

Too much effort.

 

I am curious if you would respond positively to me if I wrote "Too much effort" on any request you made of me?

 

You really seem like you're under the impression that Jesus invented these teachings, and that nobody knew killing was bad until he came along. Well, pretty much nothing attributed Jesus was an original teaching. Not even loving one's enemies.

I do not believe that Jesus "invented" the teaching of loving one's enemies. However, he did teach it. It is awesome that other people taught it too.

 

 

Did Jesus follow the words of the "prophets" who came before him? Nope. Every prophet adds, subtracts, changes. I really don't see your point.

Actually, Jesus did follow the Law of Moses and the words of the prophets that came before him. He went deeper into the Law, but he did not subtract or change the Law.

 

For example,

 

Mat 5 NIV - Introduction to the Sermon on the Mount - Bible Gateway

(I boldened some.)

 

"21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[Exodus 20:13] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[b][c] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell. 23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift."

 

 

Now, did Jesus say that murder is now acceptable? Nope. He did not abolish the command to not murder. Rather, he went deeper into the Law and showed that it is important to not let anger consume you but rather it is important to reconcile with people.

 

 

Another example accounted in Matthew 5:

 

 

"27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[Exodus 20:14] 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

 

 

Did Jesus subtract the command to not commit adultery? Nope. Instead, he went deeper into the law and showed how lust (for a woman not one's wife) is adultery too.

 

 

Another example:

 

 

"33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King."

 

 

Now, Jesus is not saying you can break your oaths now. He is not going against the command to not break one's oath. Rather, he gives the best solution to not breaking one's oath: not making an oath in the first place. It's kind of hard to break an oath one hasn't made!

 

 

 

And this whole before/after Jesus thing is a total non-starter. Like I've said many times, something is either moral or it isn't. It's not moral because somebody says it is. Or, at least this would be the case if you hold to absolute moral standard, which is an inescapable part of Christian belief.

Ok, let's say there that in a certain country, that there was not a rule prohibiting looking at another student's test and copying that student's answers while taking a test.Would it be fair to call a student who looks at another student's test immoral/unethical if there was no rule in that country at the time about NOT looking at another student's paper while taking a test? Nope. It wouldn't be fair to accuse a person of breaking a rule that didn't exist in that country.

 

That is why in schools around the USA today, the teachers are supposed to explain BEFORE TESTS that looking at another student's paper and/or copying that student's answers while taking a test is WRONG (immoral) and has negative consequences. However, if there was no rule about not looking at another student's paper, then it would be unfair to hold the students accountable to a rule that didn't exist for them.

 

The absolute morals based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, which are "an inescapable part of Christian belief" is because of Jesus Christ and his teachings and example. Moses did not live during or after Jesus Christ. Moses was not a Christian.

 

Moses was a descendant of Jacob (Israel) who G-d used to rescue his people, the Israelites, from slavery in Egypt and bring them to the land He promised them. Moses also was the man who G-d gave the Law for his people, the Israelites: the descendants of the 12 tribes/sons of Jacob (Israel). Were the Israelites in Moses' time Christians? Nope. Why not? Jesus Christ hadn't come yet to give them the opportunity to follow him.

 

When did Christianity start? It started when Jesus Christ taught his followers. The term Christian was given to his disciples (followers) first in Antioch: Acts 11:26 because they followed Jesus Christ's teachings and example. Did his disciples/followers kill/conquer those who disagreed with them? Nope. Rather, they simply told people about Jesus Christ and strived to live according to Jesus' moral code.

 

Now, Muhammad was obviously not a Christian. He never said that he was, yet he wanted Christians to accept him as a prophet. In order for Christians to have accepted him as a prophet, he would have to follow Jesus Christ. Did he? Nope.

 

 

I have pointed out why I think your reasoning is inconsistent and in error. That is not mockery or insulting, and quite frankly it borders on disrespect to keep dismissing me in this way when I put in the effort to consider and assess what you're saying. I have not made one personal comment about you, nor have I made fun of anything.

There is a way to point out why you disagree with my reasoning and beliefs and be kind and polite about it. I apologized for disrespecting you even though I personally do not think I did. I am not going to tell you though that your feelings are invalid. I am sorry for doing things that you think are disrespectful to you. You have not apologized for disrespecting me but rather negate or dismiss my feelings. How you treat me and dismiss/negate in a mocking/insulting way my answers and beliefs shows me that you do not have respect for me or my beliefs. Now, I personally do think that your dismissing my answers with comments such as "You just go into this utter abyss of moral relativism" is rude and is mocking my answers and beliefs.

 

Now, i have told Harmfulsweetz that I will try in not being offended so easily. That is why I do strive to answer your many questions and dismissals of my answers and questions with patience, kindness, and love. Do you think you are writing me with patience, kindness, and love?

 

You're not being insulted, you're being disagreed with. If you can't handle that then just say so and I will not waste any more of my time. I'm giving you considered arguments, and you're writing them off with "or whatever"

 

I wrote:

 

"Do I say that people who are not Christian just "go into this moral abyss" of whatever? That is not very nice of you to do that to me."

 

in reaction to you writing: "You have no internally consistent reasoning for how you reach these conclusions. You just go into this utter abyss of moral relativism to excuse or justify atrocities committed by people of your own book, but hang others out to dry for far lesser crimes."

 

I do not accuse Atheists of going into a moral abyss or an utter abyss of whatever. Rather, i respect why they don't believe what I do. Although I disagree with them due to my personal experiences and other peoples' experiences, I do not accuse them of "You just go into this utter abyss of..."

 

I wrote that I do not accuse you of "and just preaching back at me. I'm not looking for nasty things to say to you because I'm spiteful or mean. I say things that I think are true, disagree with what I think is wrong, and I give reasons why. I don't know why I keep having to justify myself over and over and over again.

Writing "You have no internally consistent reasoning for how you reach these conclusions. You just go into this utter abyss of moral relativism to excuse or justify atrocities committed by people of your own book, but hang others out to dry for far lesser crimes." is simply an attack on my answers. It's not being kind or polite or simply disagreeing with my answers which are based on my beliefs, but rather deliberately attacking my reasoning, which is based on my beliefs.

 

It's just another Abrahamic religion I have little interest in or respect for.

If you do not have interest in "another Abrahamic religion" why are you posting in this thread which deals with why Christians do not accept Muhammad's claims? Just curious. I can very much see that you do not respect Christianity (based on many of your posts) but I did not know that you do not respect Islam too.

 

The purpose of this thread is to show why Christians do not believe Muhammad's claims and thus are not followers of Muhammad. Christianity and Islam are 2 very different beliefs with different moral codes. I personally believe that the moral code based on Jesus' teachings and example are absolutely good, whereas I don't believe Muhammad followed Jesus' moral code.

 

Well, you do keep trying to justify them. That's not very nice either.

I explain why I believe what I believe about the Tanakh and the people who lived before Jesus' time. I explained that the killings of humans by humans accounted in the Tanakh troubles me and why it troubles me: because of Jesus' teachings. If that's "not very nice" to you that I explain what I believe about the Tanakh and the differences before Jesus and after Jesus, then that is your viewpoint.

 

That is self-contradictory. If your morality was based on Jesus, then you'd follow him regardless. Your morality, then, is based on something else. It's basically the "is something moral because god says so, or does god say something because it is moral" dilemma. I suspect that you have your own moral standard, and Jesus' teachings more or less intersect with this. But to say that an individual is the basis of your morality, then that implies that you would follow whatever they said simply because they said it. But you have said this is not the case.

I believe that Jesus is God incarnate and speaks God's words:

 

John 14 NIV - Jesus Comforts His Disciples - ?Do - Bible Gateway

"9Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. "

 

Because I believe in Jesus, I strive to follow the moral code he taught. Now, sad to say sometimes I break Jesus' moral code. For example, I have gotten angry with my sisters and thus broke the moral code accounted in Matthew 5:22. However, Jesus also gives the solution: to reconcile! (Matthew 5:24). It is my responsibility as a Christian to base my morals on what Jesus says.

 

What do you base your morals on?

 

 

The tl;dr version is that morality is an outcome of being a social animal. It's adaptive, and grows to meet demands and new requirements of living in an increasingly complex society.

 

 

Well they were. I was specifically asking you something about your beliefs, and he comes blundering in shouting "HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU!". That's rude, uncalled for, and totally unnecessary.

He didn't capitalize what you did above. If you didn't want to answer his questions, why not simply ignore him? It is not a rule in this public forum that one must answer every question another poster asks.

 

I personally believe you have dismissed my answers to your questions in a very rude and uncalled for way too. However again, I need to work on not getting offended so easily. Maybe it would be good for you to work on not being offended so easily too?

 

Regardless of our disagreements concerning Christian beliefs, I love you and I 100% believe you have the right to not believe in Christian beliefs. I also think Muslims have the right to not believe in Christian beliefs and Christians have the right to not believe in Muslim/Muhammadan beliefs. I have no desire to attack your reasons for not believing in Jesus. I have reasons why I believe in Jesus and I have reasons why I do not believe in Muhammad's claims. Whether people agree with those reasons or not is up to each person.

 

Blessings.

Edited February 28, 2013 by BetheButterfly

[M30USA]

Or he is, and Jesus is simply not worth following. Nor, perhaps, is any man.

 

So if no MAN is worth following, who would be? Hypothetically.

[BetheButterfly]

So if no MAN is worth following, who would be? Hypothetically.

 

A woman! lol!

 

I personally believe Jesus is worth following though, and am so thankful for God's amazing grace, love, and forgiveness through Jesus Christ!!!

[BetheButterfly]

Bethe, you're still under the mistaken impression that I want to keep going around in circles with you until the end of time. It evidently does not matter how many times I clarify and explain myself, so I am well and truly done with this utterly pointless exercise.

 

While to you this "exercise" is "utterly pointless", to me I am learning to love those who rudely, in my opinion, dismiss my answers concerning my beliefs. I am also striving to not be so easily offended. So, thank you so much for this discussion which is helping me grow in my walk with Christ and in Love!

 

I love you and respect that you don't believe the same as I do. Again, I apologize for writing what you deem disrespectful. That was not my intention. My intention is to explain what I believe and why.

Back to the subject of this thread:

(This is not to you specifically QuickJoe but rather in general to anyone -including you? -who is sincerely interested in why Christians do not accept Muhammad's claims)

 

There are many reasons why Christians, including me, believe that Muhammad is a false prophet. The reason that Christians do not become Muhammadans/Muslims is because we do not believe Muhammad's claims. His claims and his actions contradict Jesus' teachings and example, including Jesus' teaching to love one's enemies.

 

Jesus did not kill/conquer/expel/force payment those who did not believe his claims. Rather, he was crucified and died as the "Lamb of God" and arose from the dead, which Muhammad denies. Christians believe he fulfilled the requirement for animal sacrifices by being the ultimate sacrifice, the "lamb" provided by our Heavenly Father promised to Abraham:

 

Genesis 22 NIV - Abraham Tested - Some time later God - Bible Gateway

"8 Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together."

 

While God provided Abraham and his son Isaac a ram, an innocent animal, for the temporary burnt offering, God later on provided the ultimate offering through the person of Jesus Christ, who Christians believe also fulfills the promise of the prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy 18 NIV - Offerings for Priests and Levites - The - Bible Gateway, John 1:45 NIV - Philip found Nathanael and told him, - Bible Gateway, Acts 3 NIV - Peter Heals a Lame Beggar - One day - Bible Gateway) as well as the promise of the Anointed One on the throne of King David, the son of God - the Messiah.

 

Muhammad did not believe that Jesus is the son of God, even though it is stated in the Qur'an that Jesus is the Christ = Messiah:

 

3. The Family Of 'Imran, The House Of 'Imran

"45. Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah."

 

The Qur'an, dictated by Muhammad, denies Jesus being the son of God (or Allah, which is basically the Arabic term for God) and curses those who do:

 

9. Repentance, Dispensation

"30. The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah.s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! "

 

It is possible that Muhammad did not understand the part of God's promise to King David concerning God calling the promised/anointed one his son and the promised/anointed one calling God his father:

 

2 Samuel 7 NIV - God?s Promise to David - After the - Bible Gateway

"12 When your days are over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands."

 

Now, Jesus before his death on the cross suffered being flogged and Christians believe that Jesus took on the sins of the world, enduring our punishment that we deserve.

 

It is interesting to compare 2 Samuel 7 with Psalm 89:

 

Psalm 89 NIV - Psalm 89 - A maskil of Ethan the - Bible Gateway

26He will call out to me, ‘You are my Father,

my God, the Rock my Savior.’

27 And I will appoint him to be my firstborn,

the most exalted of the kings of the earth.

28 I will maintain my love to him forever,

and my covenant with him will never fail.

29 I will establish his line forever,

his throne as long as the heavens endure.

30 “If his sons forsake my law

and do not follow my statutes,

31 if they violate my decrees

and fail to keep my commands,

32 I will punish their sin with the rod,

their iniquity with flogging;

33 but I will not take my love from him,

nor will I ever betray my faithfulness."

 

Jesus suffered for his "children." Jesus called his followers "children" (accounted in Mark 10:24 and John 13:33.) He says people who are peacemakers will be called "children of God" accounted in Matthew 5:9 NIV - Blessed are the peacemakers, for they - Bible Gateway. He says that people who love their enemies and pray for those who persecuted them may be "children of ...Father in Heaven", accounted in Matthew 5:44-46 NIV - But I tell you, love your enemies and - Bible Gateway. He says that people who love their enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back will be children of the Most High, accounted in Luke 6:35 NIV - But love your enemies, do good to them, - Bible Gateway.

 

Continuing the topic of the Messiah/Christ=Anointed One, the descendant of King David, being called "son" by God and calling God "Father":

 

1 Chronicles 17 NIV - God?s Promise to David - After David - Bible Gateway

"2 He is the one who will build a house for me, and I will establish his throne forever. 13I will be his father, and he will be my son. I will never take my love away from him, as I took it away from your predecessor. 14I will set him over my house and my kingdom forever; his throne will be established forever.’”

 

Throughout Jesus' ministry, he called God "Father." (accounted in Matthew 7:21, Matthew 10:32-33, Matthew 12:50, Matthew 18:10; Matthew 18:19; Matthew 26:29, 39, 42, 53; Mark 8:38, Mark 14:36, Luke 2:49, Luke 9:26, Luke 10:21-22, ... John 17, and so on )

 

God called him his son, accounted in Matthew 3:17, Mark 1:11, Luke 3:22.

 

So, Muhammad did not understand why Christians, Jesus' followers, believe Jesus is the Son of God, and that to Christians based on the promises to David, being the son of God is part of the Messianic promise. This is just one of many contradictions with Christian beliefs that cause Christians to not believe Muhammad's claims.

 

Interestingly, Muhammad and the Qur'an became very hostile to the "People of the Book" - Jews and Christians:

 

"http://www.islam101.com/quran/yusufAli/QURAN/9.htm

 

"29. Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. 30. The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah.s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!"

 

 

The Qur'an, dictated by Muhammad, considers Muhammad to be Allah's Messenger and considers following the Qur'an and Muhammad's teachings/sunnah to be the "Truth." Christians however believe Muhammad is a false prophet, which is why they don't follow him.

How Muhammad treated many of those who didn't believe his claims contradict Jesus' command to love one's enemies.

While Muhammad eventually got hostile to Christians and their beliefs and wanted "Allah's curse be on them", Jesus said to

"bless those who curse you" (accounted in Luke 6:28).

[pie2]

Now, Jesus before his death on the cross suffered being flogged and Christians believe that Jesus took on the sins of the world, enduring our punishment that we deserve.

 

What are your thoughts on the death penalty in America today?

[pureinheart]

As a fellow Christian, does it give you comfort to believe that Jesus will return to do what he preaches we should not? In other words, your god is a hypocrite, hateful, vicious, unforgiving....

 

For those of us who know better, your brand of belief reveals that you are not a follower of Jesus Christ.

 

With all due respect love...I just want to throw caution to the wind here. IMO any of us are on some real shakey ground when we begin to say these things. BTDT and ended up in the Divine Woodshed.