Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Islam : Cult?
J Bananas:
*burns a u in the intersection screaming "when will it stop?!?!?"*
nibs:
--- Quote from: Shallow on May 03, 2006, 07:30:49 PM ---As for the nature of Christ and Paul, the Gospels themselves make it very clear as to what the nature of Christ was that he was of God, and if I'm not mistaken many of the Gospels not accepted by the Church said the same thing.
--- End quote ---
shallow, there are three issues here, but for the most part i think we are in agreement.
a) after having re-read several books of the gospel, i can mostly agree with a metaphorical interpretation of jesus life; such as the one proposed by john. jesus is referred to as the word; elsewhere as the light. the word representing god's will, god's laws...etc; the light representing wisdom of the path towards godliness. a human that embodied those attributes for a short time on earth.
for the most part, i see no problem if all of the seemingly literal references to jesus as a person, including his return and future reign; are interpretted metaphorically as a global return of love, peace, harmony and god's natural order. i can agree with the epistles of paul and john...etc. after interpretting their statements about christ metaphorically as a reference to the metaphor for god's word.
i maintain my disagreement with literal interpretations of the new testament which suggest that the physical form of the man should be worshipped; but accept the metaphoric interpretation which i believe is what is being suggested. i have not thoroughly gone through each book, applied the "word"/"light" metaphor and interpretted the meaning in that context; but for the most part i feel comfortable saying i can agree with that.
--- Quote ---So I'm not sure if the idea that Jesus was God came about because of Paul. But who knows for sure? (the answer is nobody).
--- End quote ---
b) there is some level of historical understanding of how the books of the new testament were compiled, who authored them...etc. paul himself wrote half of the new testament, luke was one of his pupils. matthew, john and [simon] peter actually knew jesus, luke and mark did not. james was jesus brother (half-brother); and there was a difference in how they delivered their various messages if not within the messages themselves. so there are some facts to know there.
--- Quote ---Gabriel acts as the voice of God and as far as anyone is concerned it isn't Gabriel's words but God's words so in theory you are talking to God if you are talking to Gabriel.
--- End quote ---
c) i'm wary of taking too literal of an interpretation of the meaning of gabriel talking to muhammad or daniel, and exactly what "god's words" means. is it a disembodied voice? does the angel appear? is it a voice in one's head or a vision? i remain uncertain how to literally interpret these things. it seems to me that the person being spoken too has to somehow translate/relay/interpret this...etc. i'm not 100% clear on the nature of angels; they are described in many ways.
additionally, messages are relevant for their time. i interpret messages as guidance that pushes people in the direction they need to be moving; rather than the absolute representation of what needs to be. surely if a particular action exceeds (in someway) the guidelines proscribed that isn't a bad thing.
Shallow:
Are you responding as a Muslim or as a seeker of truth or agnostic? Because as a Muslim I'd think you'd believe that Gabriel talking to the Prophet would be literal.
As for what Jesus was and how he was connected to God. I don't believe in it metaphorically. While I am open to anythign and don't discoint anything, I believe that it was the word of God that entered the body of the baby and that the body of Christ was a vessel for that word to be heard and that light to be seen. The idea of why is very simple; God had spoken to prophets in the past and he kept sending them and they kept getting it wrong afterwards and skewing it for their own sake or for the sake of what they thought was right, so he sent the word down and put it in a body so that the word could be heard unaltered. That's how I believe it and it suits me fine to believe it that way. If when I die I am told that it was not that way then I'll gladly accept that, but until I have solid reason to believe otherwise I'll believe this way.
As for how the book was written or by whom; it has never really been figured out historically. The Gospel of John may not have even been written by him. No one can know for sure. As for half brother James. I used to think he was a half brother in that he was the a son of Mary and Joseph after Jesus was born, but it was told to me that he was the son of Joseph with a previous wife. It doesn't say if he is an older or younger brother as far as I know, so I am not sure if it is step or half brother.
nibs:
--- Quote from: Shallow on May 06, 2006, 08:41:00 PM ---Are you responding as a Muslim or as a seeker of truth or agnostic? Because as a Muslim I'd think you'd believe that Gabriel talking to the Prophet would be literal.
--- End quote ---
i cannot speak for all muslims. the qu'ran states that all muslims should seek and only be guided by the truth. thus i would consider myself both a muslim and a seeker of the truth.
i accept that the angel gabriel spoke to muhammad several times, and this was through visions. to emphasize the wariness i mentioned earlier, this is what the qu'ran says:
sura 16:102
Say, the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from thy Lord in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide and Glad Tidings to Muslims.
sura 2:97
Say: Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel-for he brings down the (revelation) to thy heart by God's will, a confirmation of what went before, and guidance and glad tidings for those who believe,-
you will notice that it doesn't explain the nature of angels or how they communicate with and get direction from god. it does not explain how angels instruct people and prophets specifically.
in sura 18:60-82 the qu'ran tells a story of how moses observed an enlightened servant of god and did not understand much of the direction he was given. similarly it would be arrogant for me to state that i completely understood: the nature of angels, the exact nature and purpose of how gabriel instructed muhammad, and exactly how to interpret that instruction.
the qu'ran itself states that god uses allegory to communicate ideas:
sura 2:26
GOD does not shy away from citing any kind of allegory,* from the tiny mosquito and greater. As for those who believe, they know that it is the truth from their Lord. As for those who disbelieve, they say, "What did GOD mean by such an allegory?" He misleads many thereby, and guides many thereby. But He never misleads thereby except the wicked
thus i am hesitant to adhere to such strict literal interpretation and conclusions as you drew earlier.
--- Quote ---As for what Jesus was and how he was connected to God. I don't believe in it metaphorically. While I am open to anythign and don't discoint anything, I believe that it was the word of God that entered the body of the baby and that the body of Christ was a vessel for that word to be heard and that light to be seen.
--- End quote ---
as jesus was the word (and this is also confirmed in the qu'ran) and the light; thus his life is the example for others to follow. the word of god being god's law, god's natural order...etc. we don't disagree here.
if i look through the rest of the new testament; and replace "christ jesus" with "the word of god"; now the writings of john and paul are more acceptable to me; as they are not invoking worship of a man who lived and died; but what that man represented: which is the word of god. that is the metaphor of which i was speaking; the same metaphor confirmed within the qu'ran.
--- Quote ---As for half brother James. I used to think he was a half brother in that he was the a son of Mary and Joseph after Jesus was born, but it was told to me that he was the son of Joseph with a previous wife. It doesn't say if he is an older or younger brother as far as I know, so I am not sure if it is step or half brother.
--- End quote ---
this was something the catholic church made up as it maintains that mary was always a virgin, even after her marriage to joseph. what's the purpose of getting married if to stay a virgin?
matthew 13:55-56
Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this [man] all these things?
so according to matthew, who actually knew jesus; jesus had several brothers (who are named) and sisters as well (who being women need not be named).
the bible mentions his mother, father and brothers and sisters. the catholic church decides that his father had another wife (unworthy of mention) and his mother always remained a virgin.
how is the catholic church taken seriously?
Shallow:
So you believe that the word of God that Muhammad received may have been an altered word of the angel? If so, doesn't that go against what Islam is? I'm not sure I'm just asking.
Even if you replace Jesus with The Word in te letters of Paul I still disagree with much of what Paul says. What with this whole worshipping a man business? Know one worships a man in Christainty. We worship God. The same God that created the Universe. The same God that lives inside each of us. And the same God that entered Mary's womb and told the people how to live. That is how Christians see it. Jesus for us wasn't some guy who the Lord spoke to. He was the Lord in flesh form for 33 years or whatever it was, but he existed long before those 33 years years and long after. It's never a question of worshipping a man with me.
How do you know the church just made up the step bother theory? And if the Church made it up and changed the Bible then why wouldn't they leave that out? Also, just like John there is no roof that Matthew himself wrote that (just getting the info out there).
The verse you quoted still shows no proof that they were younger brothers and sisters or that they were Mary's children. It says that He was the son of Mary, but not that the others were. The Bible also never explains what happened to Joseph, leading many to believe he was a much older man who died when Jesus was still rather young. It is very plausible that he was an older man with children who had lost his wife and needed a younger woman to mother his children and that's how he was arranged to Mary. I am not saying I know for sure that this is the case. I am not so bold that I can pretend to know something like this for certain.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version