Total Posts:48|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Question To Pupils Of Biblical Studies

Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 12:09:04 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
- I have a question directed at those who are studying or have some credentials in Biblical studies. I am not interested in personal opinions on the subject, AT ALL. So please do share an answer if you have one.

Disclaimer: I am no expert on the subject, in fact I only have a general idea about it. My inquiries, thus, might show my loose grasp on some of the details. I stand to be corrected.

- Basically, I want to know the extend of modern Biblical studies on whether it accommodates the classical Islamic view of mainstream Christianity in relation to the person of Jesus. Particularly, classically, as evidenced by the works of theologians such as al-Ghazali & ash-Shahristani, Muslims's view of the relationship between 'Pauline Christianity' & the original message of Jesus (pbuh) postulates the following:
1. Jesus (pbuh) was a practicing Jew, all his life.
2. Jesus (pbuh) had his own book/revelation: Evangel ('Injeel' in Arabic, 'the good news'), which was either different or at the origin of the Christian gospels.
3. Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified, rather someone else seemed to have been in his stead.
4. Jesus (pbuh) never claimed to be divine nor was he resurrected, rather it was Paul in his travels who, either due to fanaticism or misguidance, preached his divinity & resurrection...
5. The preachings of Paul are forms of polytheism inherited from gentile traditions, at the expense of monotheistic hebrew traditions.
6. The jews who followed Jesus (pbuh), as opposed to the gentiles, did preach the original Evangel before they were killed by the Romans.
7. The legacy of these teachings persevered until the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), as evidenced by the beliefs of some christians in Arabia, such as Bahira the monk, Waraq'a Ibn Nawfal, Salman al-Farisi...
...etc.
=> Though, not all Muslims share these views (often disputed), these are the ones I am aware of which are supported by some of great scholars of the Islamic Tradition, hence why I am interested in knowing the modern stance on them.

My question is, are there any studies, theories, or analysis in the corpus of modern Biblical studies which shares, partially or totally, any of the above views? Why or why not?

Thank you.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
be_diligent
Posts: 399
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:16:08 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 12:09:04 AM, Yassine wrote:
- I have a question directed at those who are studying or have some credentials in Biblical studies. I am not interested in personal opinions on the subject, AT ALL. So please do share an answer if you have one.

Disclaimer: I am no expert on the subject, in fact I only have a general idea about it. My inquiries, thus, might show my loose grasp on some of the details. I stand to be corrected.

- Basically, I want to know the extend of modern Biblical studies on whether it accommodates the classical Islamic view of mainstream Christianity in relation to the person of Jesus. Particularly, classically, as evidenced by the works of theologians such as al-Ghazali & ash-Shahristani, Muslims's view of the relationship between 'Pauline Christianity' & the original message of Jesus (pbuh) postulates the following:
1. Jesus (pbuh) was a practicing Jew, all his life.

Jesus was a practicing Jew. He gave the law, and He kept the law, but He kept it rightly, not in the way that the Pharisees were keeping it.

Jesus told the the multitude, and His disciples regarding the pharisees (who were supposed to be instructors of the law): Matthew 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

And He said this to the Pharisees, which shows that they were not following the law.

Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Matthew 23:24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
So yes, Jesus kept the law, His law correctly. Not as the Pharisees were keeping it.

2. Jesus (pbuh) had his own book/revelation: Evangel ('Injeel' in Arabic, 'the good news'), which was either different or at the origin of the Christian gospels.

There is no other book than the bible. Jesus did indeed have authority in what is written in it.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Speaking of Jesus: John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

3. Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified, rather someone else seemed to have been in his stead.

Jesus did die on the cross, for the sins of all who would believe Him.
But He arose from the dead and ascended back into heaven.

Mark 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

4. Jesus (pbuh) never claimed to be divine nor was he resurrected, rather it was Paul in his travels who, either due to fanaticism or misguidance, preached his divinity & resurrection...

The disciples, who walked with Jesus preached of His death and Resurrection. Jesus Himself told them about it even before it happened. So it wasn't only the Apostle Paul. The four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are all dedicated to this very subject.

Jesus told of how He came from God, from Heaven, and how He would return to the Father.

John 16:28 I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.

John 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

There are several passages that speak of Jesus being worshiped, which no prophet ever accepted the worship of men.

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
Matthew 28:17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.

5. The preachings of Paul are forms of polytheism inherited from gentile traditions, at the expense of monotheistic hebrew traditions.

One of Jesus's own disciples said this of Paul.

2 Peter 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.


Paul was blessed with a very good understanding of the differences between flesh and Spirit. Paul himself, was a Pharisee before he met Jesus on the road to Damascus.

That single point in time set off a massive ministry, not only to the Jews, but to the Gentiles.

Because Paul's writings are so indepth, many do wrest his words, and many only take half of what he wrote rather than consider all of what he wrote. Paul taught what Jesus taught.

I personally believe that this was meant to be, for we are told to seek, knock and ask. God wants to teach us His ways but many prefer to lean on their own understanding, which is silly because we as human beings are very limited in what we do understand.
We need God to show us His way.

6. The jews who followed Jesus (pbuh), as opposed to the gentiles, did preach the original Evangel before they were killed by the Romans.

The twelve Disciples were Jews who followed Jesus, and Just as Paul taught the OT, so did they. They all referenced Old Testament passages on several occasions. The disciples fully accepted Paul.

7. The legacy of these teachings persevered until the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), as evidenced by the beliefs of some christians in Arabia, such as Bahira the monk, Waraq'a Ibn Nawfal, Salman al-Farisi...
...etc.

There is no mention whatsoever, of the Prophet Mohammad. I've spoken to Muslims who reference one verse in particular to make that claim, and I will show you what it actually says.

John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

Jesus is speaking of the Holy Spirit.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Notice how in the above verse( John 15:26) Jesus said the Spirit of truth proceeds from the Father? Jesus also said this of Himself. Thus: the Trinity.

There are other verses and passages that line up with this. I'll add one more.

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

John 8:42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

=> Though, not all Muslims share these views (often disputed), these are the ones I am aware of which are supported by some of great scholars of the Islamic Tradition, hence why I am interested in knowing the modern stance on them.

The bible is not a "modern stance," although on some occasions certain people attribute more of a modern stance to it. That in no way actually changes what was written.

the Old Testament is dated back to 100 BC, and most of the books of the New Testament to about 60 AD -- EXACTLY when they were claimed to have been written.
the Koran was written around 645-675 ad. During the life of
muhammad.
There are no ancient copies of the Koran dating before 750 AD.

So you see, the bible is much older than the Koran.

My question is, are there any studies, theories, or analysis in the corpus of modern Biblical studies which shares, partially or totally, any of the above views? Why or why not?

Thank you.

I have never met a Christian of any denomination who believes tha
be_diligent
Posts: 399
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:22:58 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
Quoting:
My question is, are there any studies, theories, or analysis in the corpus of modern Biblical studies which shares, partially or totally, any of the above views? Why or why not?

Thank you.

---------

I have never met a Christian of any denomination who does not believe that Jesus died and rose again. It is the cornerstone of Christianity, and is both NT and OT based.
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:25:52 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 7:16:08 AM, be_diligent wrote:

The bible is not a "modern stance," although on some occasions certain people attribute more of a modern stance to it. That in no way actually changes what was written.

the Old Testament is dated back to 100 BC, and most of the books of the New Testament to about 60 AD -- EXACTLY when they were claimed to have been written.
the Koran was written around 645-675 ad. During the life of
muhammad.
There are no ancient copies of the Koran dating before 750 AD.

So you see, the bible is much older than the Koran.

- Thanks for the detailed response. Yet, that is exactly what I was referring to when I specified 'no personal opinion'! I am looking for the stance(s) of modern academic Biblical studies, NOT Catholicism!
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:27:13 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 7:22:58 AM, be_diligent wrote:

I have never met a Christian of any denomination who does not believe that Jesus died and rose again. It is the cornerstone of Christianity, and is both NT and OT based.

- Case in point.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
be_diligent
Posts: 399
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:28:12 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 7:25:52 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/27/2016 7:16:08 AM, be_diligent wrote:

The bible is not a "modern stance," although on some occasions certain people attribute more of a modern stance to it. That in no way actually changes what was written.

the Old Testament is dated back to 100 BC, and most of the books of the New Testament to about 60 AD -- EXACTLY when they were claimed to have been written.
the Koran was written around 645-675 ad. During the life of
muhammad.
There are no ancient copies of the Koran dating before 750 AD.

So you see, the bible is much older than the Koran.

- Thanks for the detailed response. Yet, that is exactly what I was referring to when I specified 'no personal opinion'! I am looking for the stance(s) of modern academic Biblical studies, NOT Catholicism!

I'm not a Catholic Yassine, I've only once been in a Catholic church, and it was for a funeral.

Everything that I shared is 100 percent Bible. And it's true.
be_diligent
Posts: 399
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:30:16 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 7:27:13 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/27/2016 7:22:58 AM, be_diligent wrote:

I have never met a Christian of any denomination who does not believe that Jesus died and rose again. It is the cornerstone of Christianity, and is both NT and OT based.

- Case in point.

That is the truth. What you are looking for is some Christian who will agree with you that Jesus did not die for your sins. You just won't find a true Christian who will agree with you.

You asked, I answered.

Now it is your opinions that are getting in the way.
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:35:08 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 7:28:12 AM, be_diligent wrote:

I'm not a Catholic Yassine, I've only once been in a Catholic church, and it was for a funeral.

- Cool.

Everything that I shared is 100 percent Bible.

- Not what I am looking for.

And it's true.

- From where you're standing, maybe.

That is the truth. What you are looking for is some Christian who will agree with you that Jesus did not die for your sins.

- No. I am looking for the views of modern western Biblical studies wether they agree with that. Do you have any expertise in those?

You just won't find a true Christian who will agree with you.

- Don't be too sure, sects in Christianity differ in virtually every aspect of it.

You asked, I answered.

- Thanks, but not the answer I am looking for.

Now it is your opinions that are getting in the way.

- Questions*.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
be_diligent
Posts: 399
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:38:27 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 7:35:08 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/27/2016 7:28:12 AM, be_diligent wrote:

I'm not a Catholic Yassine, I've only once been in a Catholic church, and it was for a funeral.

- Cool.

Everything that I shared is 100 percent Bible.

- Not what I am looking for.

And it's true.

- From where you're standing, maybe.

That is the truth. What you are looking for is some Christian who will agree with you that Jesus did not die for your sins.

- No. I am looking for the views of modern western Biblical studies wether they agree with that. Do you have any expertise in those?

You just won't find a true Christian who will agree with you.

- Don't be too sure, sects in Christianity differ in virtually every aspect of it.

You asked, I answered.

- Thanks, but not the answer I am looking for.

Now it is your opinions that are getting in the way.

- Questions*.

There is one precept that is the basis of ALL Christianity, and that is that Jesus died on the cross, rose again, and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

If that is not the basis of a person who calls him or herself Christian, then the person simply is not a Christian.

Keep looking Yassine , you are sure to find what you're looking for since it doesn't involve the truth. You can ask the guy here on the forums who thinks that he is Christ....

Good luck with that.
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 7:46:39 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 7:38:27 AM, be_diligent wrote:

There is one precept that is the basis of ALL Christianity, and that is that Jesus died on the cross, rose again, and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

- I am aware of the creed.

If that is not the basis of a person who calls him or herself Christian, then the person simply is not a Christian.

- They are called heretics by the Church, yeah. But, they still exist.

Keep looking Yassine , you are sure to find what you're looking for since it doesn't involve the truth. You can ask the guy here on the forums who thinks that he is Christ....

Good luck with that.

- Thanks, bye.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 10:32:21 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
- I thought this was the Religion forum. How come nobody knows anything about religion here!!??
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 12:11:56 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 10:32:21 PM, Yassine wrote:
- I thought this was the Religion forum. How come nobody knows anything about religion here!!??

But, of course, there are gaggles of theists on this forum who are experts on religion, at least, that's what they keep telling us.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 4:04:55 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 12:11:56 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/27/2016 10:32:21 PM, Yassine wrote:
- I thought this was the Religion forum. How come nobody knows anything about religion here!!??

But, of course, there are gaggles of theists on this forum who are experts on religion, at least, that's what they keep telling us.

- I don't suppose you have the credentials I am looking for?
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 5:55:52 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 4:04:55 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/28/2016 12:11:56 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/27/2016 10:32:21 PM, Yassine wrote:
- I thought this was the Religion forum. How come nobody knows anything about religion here!!??

But, of course, there are gaggles of theists on this forum who are experts on religion, at least, that's what they keep telling us.

- I don't suppose you have the credentials I am looking for?

One doesn't need credentials to discuss and understand the contents of a holy book.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 5:30:59 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 5:55:52 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/28/2016 4:04:55 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/28/2016 12:11:56 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/27/2016 10:32:21 PM, Yassine wrote:
- I thought this was the Religion forum. How come nobody knows anything about religion here!!??

But, of course, there are gaggles of theists on this forum who are experts on religion, at least, that's what they keep telling us.

- I don't suppose you have the credentials I am looking for?

One doesn't need credentials to discuss and understand the contents of a holy book.

- The major problem of religion right there.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 5:35:19 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 12:09:04 AM, Yassine wrote:
My question is, are there any studies, theories, or analysis in the corpus of modern Biblical studies which shares, partially or totally, any of the above views? Why or why not?

Yassine, although we both choose not to discuss issues with one another, I wanted you to know that I found this post interesting, and am looking forward to reading responses.

Although I hold Islam no more authoritative than any other Abrahamic faith, I find Muslim perspectives on Christianity interesting, and think Muslim scholarship on other Abrahamic traditions can be useful historiologically.

So, thank you for posting.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 5:46:05 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 7:22:58 AM, be_diligent wrote:
Quoting:
My question is, are there any studies, theories, or analysis in the corpus of modern Biblical studies which shares, partially or totally, any of the above views? Why or why not?

ME: Because they do not agree with the scriptures, and the answer you got from be-diligent is equally incorrect.


But, I should imagine, that you will get a variation of religious interpretations of the Bible subject matter.
Thank you.

---------

I have never met a Christian of any denomination who does not believe that Jesus died and rose again. It is the cornerstone of Christianity, and is both NT and OT based.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 5:54:05 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 12:09:04 AM, Yassine wrote:
- I have a question directed at those who are studying or have some credentials in Biblical studies. I am not interested in personal opinions on the subject, AT ALL. So please do share an answer if you have one.

Disclaimer: I am no expert on the subject, in fact I only have a general idea about it. My inquiries, thus, might show my loose grasp on some of the details. I stand to be corrected.

- Basically, I want to know the extend of modern Biblical studies on whether it accommodates the classical Islamic view of mainstream Christianity in relation to the person of Jesus. Particularly, classically, as evidenced by the works of theologians such as al-Ghazali & ash-Shahristani, Muslims's view of the relationship between 'Pauline Christianity' & the original message of Jesus (pbuh) postulates the following:
1. Jesus (pbuh) was a practicing Jew, all his life.

ME: Up until he established the Christian way of life at his baptism and afterwards. On the Jewish law Jesus said: "Do not think that I came to do away with or undo the Law [of Moses] or the [writings of the] Prophets; I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. Meaning that his ransom sacrifice replaced the Mosaic law. He agreed that the old law was a good one, and he was not going to ridicule those laws of the old Prophets like Abraham and Moses and others.
2. Jesus (pbuh) had his own book/revelation: Evangel ('Injeel' in Arabic, 'the good news'), which was either different or at the origin of the Christian gospels.
3. Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified, rather someone else seemed to have been in his stead.
ME:This is not t rue, and there is sufficient evidence to say who it was the died on the torture stake.
4. Jesus (pbuh) never claimed to be divine nor was he resurrected, rather it was Paul in his travels who, either due to fanaticism or misguidance, preached his divinity & resurrection...ME: Wrong
5. The preachings of Paul are forms of polytheism inherited from gentile traditions, at the expense of monotheistic hebrew traditions.
6. The jews who followed Jesus (pbuh), as opposed to the gentiles, did preach the original Evangel before they were killed by the Romans.
7. The legacy of these teachings persevered until the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), as evidenced by the beliefs of some christians in Arabia, such as Bahira the monk, Waraq'a Ibn Nawfal, Salman al-Farisi...
...etc.
=> Though, not all Muslims share these views (often disputed), these are the ones I am aware of which are supported by some of great scholars of the Islamic Tradition, hence why I am interested in knowing the modern stance on them.

My question is, are there any studies, theories, or analysis in the corpus of modern Biblical studies which shares, partially or totally, any of the above views? Why or why not?

Thank you.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 4:11:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 5:30:59 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/28/2016 5:55:52 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/28/2016 4:04:55 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/28/2016 12:11:56 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/27/2016 10:32:21 PM, Yassine wrote:
- I thought this was the Religion forum. How come nobody knows anything about religion here!!??

But, of course, there are gaggles of theists on this forum who are experts on religion, at least, that's what they keep telling us.

- I don't suppose you have the credentials I am looking for?

One doesn't need credentials to discuss and understand the contents of a holy book.

- The major problem of religion right there.

Why? There is no one to validate credentials, that would have to be endorsed by God himself, hence there is no such thing as having credentials for religion, the entire concept is a fallacy.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Geogeer
Posts: 4,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 4:41:54 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 4:11:13 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/29/2016 5:30:59 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/28/2016 5:55:52 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/28/2016 4:04:55 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/28/2016 12:11:56 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/27/2016 10:32:21 PM, Yassine wrote:
- I thought this was the Religion forum. How come nobody knows anything about religion here!!??

But, of course, there are gaggles of theists on this forum who are experts on religion, at least, that's what they keep telling us.

- I don't suppose you have the credentials I am looking for?

One doesn't need credentials to discuss and understand the contents of a holy book.

- The major problem of religion right there.

Why? There is no one to validate credentials, that would have to be endorsed by God himself, hence there is no such thing as having credentials for religion, the entire concept is a fallacy.

Actually you've just listed Catholicism's claim to authoritatively teach the Christian faith. It was the Church established by Jesus Christ who was God. This is why Catholic bishops had the authority to say which books belong in the Bible and which ones don't. It is the only religion in the world that makes this authoritative claim - and hence why it is the most hated.

Ironic that you've touched on how one can determine true credentials while trying to show there are no real credentials.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 5:07:36 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 4:41:54 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 1/29/2016 4:11:13 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/29/2016 5:30:59 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/28/2016 5:55:52 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/28/2016 4:04:55 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/28/2016 12:11:56 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/27/2016 10:32:21 PM, Yassine wrote:
- I thought this was the Religion forum. How come nobody knows anything about religion here!!??

But, of course, there are gaggles of theists on this forum who are experts on religion, at least, that's what they keep telling us.

- I don't suppose you have the credentials I am looking for?

One doesn't need credentials to discuss and understand the contents of a holy book.

- The major problem of religion right there.

Why? There is no one to validate credentials, that would have to be endorsed by God himself, hence there is no such thing as having credentials for religion, the entire concept is a fallacy.

Actually you've just listed Catholicism's claim to authoritatively teach the Christian faith. It was the Church established by Jesus Christ who was God.

Sorry, but there is no evidence whatsoever that Jesus Christ, if he existed, was God.

This is why Catholic bishops had the authority to say which books belong in the Bible and which ones don't.

No, only God has that authority. And, we have not seen any gods giving out that authority to anyone else.

It is the only religion in the world that makes this authoritative claim - and hence why it is the most hated.

Ironic that you've touched on how one can determine true credentials while trying to show there are no real credentials.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Geogeer
Posts: 4,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 6:32:25 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 5:07:36 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/29/2016 4:41:54 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 1/29/2016 4:11:13 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:

<snip>

Why? There is no one to validate credentials, that would have to be endorsed by God himself, hence there is no such thing as having credentials for religion, the entire concept is a fallacy.

Actually you've just listed Catholicism's claim to authoritatively teach the Christian faith. It was the Church established by Jesus Christ who was God.

Sorry, but there is no evidence whatsoever that Jesus Christ, if he existed, was God.

That is definitely wrong. There is no evidence that you find satisfying. The same evidence is satisfying to others.

This is why Catholic bishops had the authority to say which books belong in the Bible and which ones don't.

No, only God has that authority. And, we have not seen any gods giving out that authority to anyone else.

Once again if Christianity is true, then Catholicism is true. If false then both are false.
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 4:23:31 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 5:54:05 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 1/27/2016 12:09:04 AM, Yassine wrote:
- I have a question directed at those who are studying or have some credentials in Biblical studies. I am not interested in personal opinions on the subject, AT ALL. So please do share an answer if you have one.

Disclaimer: I am no expert on the subject, in fact I only have a general idea about it. My inquiries, thus, might show my loose grasp on some of the details. I stand to be corrected.

- Basically, I want to know the extend of modern Biblical studies on whether it accommodates the classical Islamic view of mainstream Christianity in relation to the person of Jesus. Particularly, classically, as evidenced by the works of theologians such as al-Ghazali & ash-Shahristani, Muslims's view of the relationship between 'Pauline Christianity' & the original message of Jesus (pbuh) postulates the following:
1. Jesus (pbuh) was a practicing Jew, all his life.

ME: Up until he established the Christian way of life at his baptism and afterwards. On the Jewish law Jesus said: "Do not think that I came to do away with or undo the Law [of Moses] or the [writings of the] Prophets; I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. Meaning that his ransom sacrifice replaced the Mosaic law. He agreed that the old law was a good one, and he was not going to ridicule those laws of the old Prophets like Abraham and Moses and others.
2. Jesus (pbuh) had his own book/revelation: Evangel ('Injeel' in Arabic, 'the good news'), which was either different or at the origin of the Christian gospels.
3. Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified, rather someone else seemed to have been in his stead.
ME:This is not t rue, and there is sufficient evidence to say who it was the died on the torture stake.
4. Jesus (pbuh) never claimed to be divine nor was he resurrected, rather it was Paul in his travels who, either due to fanaticism or misguidance, preached his divinity & resurrection...ME: Wrong
5. The preachings of Paul are forms of polytheism inherited from gentile traditions, at the expense of monotheistic hebrew traditions.
6. The jews who followed Jesus (pbuh), as opposed to the gentiles, did preach the original Evangel before they were killed by the Romans.
7. The legacy of these teachings persevered until the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), as evidenced by the beliefs of some christians in Arabia, such as Bahira the monk, Waraq'a Ibn Nawfal, Salman al-Farisi...
...etc.
=> Though, not all Muslims share these views (often disputed), these are the ones I am aware of which are supported by some of great scholars of the Islamic Tradition, hence why I am interested in knowing the modern stance on them.

My question is, are there any studies, theories, or analysis in the corpus of modern Biblical studies which shares, partially or totally, any of the above views? Why or why not?

Thank you.

- Thanks for let me know about your opinions, though, as I said, I am not interested.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 4:34:39 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 5:35:19 AM, RuvDraba wrote:

Yassine, although we both choose not to discuss issues with one another, I wanted you to know that I found this post interesting, and am looking forward to reading responses.

- Sure, do stick around. :-)

Although I hold Islam no more authoritative than any other Abrahamic faith, I find Muslim perspectives on Christianity interesting,

- 'Interesting' in what sense?

and think Muslim scholarship on other Abrahamic traditions can be useful historiologically.

- Actually, the first generations of Muslim scholarship on Christianity (with its various sects) & Judaism came from newly convert patriarchs & rabbis to Islam, thus later generations (from Arabs & such) had authentic extensive understanding of these traditions. Plus, Muslim scholars often rely on these traditions for purposes of interpreting the Qur'an & codifying laws for dhimmis.

So, thank you for posting.

- My pleasure.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 6:55:21 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 4:34:39 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/29/2016 5:35:19 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
Although I hold Islam no more authoritative than any other Abrahamic faith, I find Muslim perspectives on Christianity interesting,
- 'Interesting' in what sense?
In an historiological and cultural sense. My principle interests in religious history relate to human thought and cultural development.

and think Muslim scholarship on other Abrahamic traditions can be useful historiologically.
- Actually, the first generations of Muslim scholarship on Christianity (with its various sects) & Judaism came from newly convert patriarchs & rabbis to Islam
That's interesting too. Are these early converts named, and are their writings preserved?
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 7:29:37 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 6:55:21 AM, RuvDraba wrote:

In an historiological and cultural sense. My principle interests in religious history relate to human thought and cultural development.

- Cool.

That's interesting too. Are these early converts named,

- LOL! Evidently. The first among them is a companion to the Prophet (pbuh), named 'Abdullah Ibn Sulam, who was a Jew. The most famous is one named Ka'b al-Ahbar, also a Jew, & a successor (someone who as thought by the companions). Christian converts to Islam, however, started getting into this like a century later, particularly in response to other Christians who were bashing Islam & writing books trying to disprove it.

and are their writings preserved?

- Some, yes, albeit, they are cited very frequently by others engaged in the field.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 9:05:39 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 7:29:37 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/30/2016 6:55:21 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
Are these early converts named,
The first among them is a companion to the Prophet (pbuh), named 'Abdullah Ibn Sulam, who was a Jew. The most famous is one named Ka'b al-Ahbar, also a Jew, & a successor (someone who as thought by the companions).

Thank you for the references, Yassine. I found brief biographies of each in an online (1906) Jewish encyclopaedia [http://jewishencyclopedia.com...], [http://jewishencyclopedia.com...] -- which I mention only in verification that Jewish history recognises them too.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 6:19:18 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 6:32:25 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 1/29/2016 5:07:36 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/29/2016 4:41:54 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 1/29/2016 4:11:13 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:

<snip>

Why? There is no one to validate credentials, that would have to be endorsed by God himself, hence there is no such thing as having credentials for religion, the entire concept is a fallacy.

Actually you've just listed Catholicism's claim to authoritatively teach the Christian faith. It was the Church established by Jesus Christ who was God.

Sorry, but there is no evidence whatsoever that Jesus Christ, if he existed, was God.

That is definitely wrong. There is no evidence that you find satisfying. The same evidence is satisfying to others.

But, there is no evidence, so how can you be satisfied with no evidence?

This is why Catholic bishops had the authority to say which books belong in the Bible and which ones don't.

No, only God has that authority. And, we have not seen any gods giving out that authority to anyone else.

Once again if Christianity is true, then Catholicism is true. If false then both are false.

I do not see either of them having any validity, myths and superstitions, at best.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 7:10:19 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
The only one"s in Christian denominations that I am aware of that would even consider that Jesus isn"t the Son of God or a deity or the only Way to God is the Jehovah witnesses. But their version of the Bible is modified to accommodate their beliefs which isn"t mainstream Christianity at all. Any honest bible study would yield that the statements you"ve posted are not biblically accurate or supported.