From the book of the 'Imrans,
Chapter 3 verses 45-46
The angels said to Mary: 'God bids you rejoice in a Word from Him. His name is the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary. He shall be noble in this world an in the world to come, and shall be one of those who are favoured. He shall preach to men in his cradle and in the prime of manhood, and shall lead a righteous life'
Is it just me or does the Koran actually say that Jesus is the Messiah?! Jesus has a lot of emphasis taken off His importance as compared to the Christian faith, but it still calls Him the Messiah.
Interesting in this re-told watered down version of the original truth, the very important fact of Jesus being the 'Son of God' and not just the 'Son of Mary' has been lost.
I wonder how many Muslims have actually read this themselves, I have a feeling most Muslims only know what their Mufti's tell them. Please tell me if I'm wrong, I would love to be proven wrong - and if I am wrong - please tell me your thoughts on this passage.
Praise to God that we have the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and not just a re-told version of it passed down the generations with parts being lost or being changed.
"I warn everyone who hears the words o the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."
Revelation 22:18-09
12 comments:
good pick up simon!
apparently there is parts of the koran that are more authorative than others... the most recent being the most authorative...
it was done that way because mohommad kept changing the laws as to how many wifes you could have. the number changing every time he met a girl he wanted to marry...lol
so, i wonder if the above passage is one of the less authorative passages.
i really get the sense that mohommad was tricked by a demon that appeared to him and then as he went along he got worse and worse.
Im reminded of this: "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!" Galatians 1
You wrote:
"Praise to God that we have the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and not just a re-told version of it passed down the generations with parts being lost or being changed."
Perhaps its time you studied your own faith tradition and discovered that in fact most of the bible is a retold version that was passed down the generations for many many years and lots of parts of the bible have been changed.
Does this make it any less the Word of God? No, I don't think so, but I think it is wise to acknowledge the truth about our own scriptures.
Thanks Celeste,
The Koran as James states above kept being changed according to how a man felt on the day - my God is the same today as yesterday!!
He doesn't change His mind depending on worldly things and not influenced by man nor blackmailed by man - but only heavenly things.
As James said some parts have more authority than others - how confusing is that - there's no consistancy.
Thanks for dropping by!
i now what your saying too Celeste. But its amazing how many NT manuscripts have been found, its an extreme excessive amount.
none of the bits that are very different from one manuscript to the other change the thrust of Christianity... Theres just too much that is good... The theology is way too deep.
I think we do lose some great points in some translations tho.
But there is no comparison between islam and Christianity, the koran and the Bible! Christianity and the Bible are way more consistan than islam, and thats what Id expect with the God of the Christians being the creator of the universe and saviour of the world and the god of islam destined for eternal punishment in hell!
Hi Celeste, my name is Kenneth. I really liked what u had to say about the Bible. Did you know that the original Hebrew word for virgin (almah) describing Mary, actually means young woman. I would suggest that there would be a significant impact on the theology about Christ because of this change.
So if it was ok for Mary, how about u and me get together and discuss the theology of The Song of Solomon (1:13)
Kenneth
It really saddens me, James, to think that you people have so little regard or respect for someone else's sacred texts. It is one thing to disagree with someone, it is another to mock or treat them with such disrespect. Please show me where Jesus does this. This is very bad stuff and could not possibly be supported by a true faith in Jesus. Even when Jesus discusses the right place to worship with the Samaritan woman he treats her with respect and doesn't denigrate her beliefs. Please be careful.
Kenneth,
Even if the original hebrew word for virgin can be tranlsated as young woman, she was still un-married therefore this tells me she was still pure - if that's what you're trying to twist this into.
She was also 'highly favoured' by God (Luke 1:28) so if she was un-married and not pure this would not have been true as such.
Also you might like to try that interpretation of virgin out on verse 34 of Luke 1 which says "How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?" Try it in context.
So how will your attemped perversion change the theology of Christians? It won't work, good try though, it's all in the eye of the beholder, you want to be perverted, you will see everything perverted.
how did i mock islam? show me please? r u saying i cant say what the bible says anon?
That's my whole point James, you are so self absorbed and narrow minded that you can't even take a step back and look at yourself and your attitudes towards those who are different. Try getting the plank out of your eye before trying to remove someone else's speck.
This is your interpretation of what the Bible says.
- "none of the bits that are very different from one manuscript to the other change the thrust of Christianity... Theres just too much that is good... The theology is way too deep."
"I think we do lose some great points in some translations tho."
Even within the same blog you can't make up your mind, we either loose something in the translation or we don't - which is it?
This is pathetic!!
Anonymous are you a Christian?
If you are, what is your point in trying to find holes in the Bible and in Christianity? If you're not, good luck, have fun, it's your ticket to eternal life.
James said very clearly, and you know this, that the Bible in all it's copies hardly varies - every copy was very carefully copied, every single letter. When James said he thinks we loose some great points in some translations though, you must know he means the way it's said and it's impact - not that it actaully looses parts of scripture!!!
We'd love to catch up with you one on one, or even as a group, just email either of us to organise a time. (We're in Melbourne though so you might have to come up here!)
This is the typical sort of response I would expect. The one that is so defensive about the Scriptures that it fails to see the truth about them. There is no where in the Scriptures where it says they are infallible, or without error. And I would agree that the truths in Scripture are beyond our understanding almost, I certainly agree that they are deep. But that isn't because our Bible is without error. That's because wisdom is wisdom, truth is truth, love is love, whether it is found in the Christian Bible or the Koran or the Torah or even some pre-Bible culture from ancient times - funnily enough, that's where some of the old testament stories and writings derive from.
The Scriptures say that we shouldn't change or alter them, too late, every generation of Bible believing "Christians" has done for the last however many hundreds of years as they find new discoveries and therefore new understanding through archeology.
I certainly think that there will be no revelation of God that Jesus hasn't already revealed, however, I don't believe for one moment that I totally understand that revelation, I think that would be a tad arrogant. I think that the scriptures are so sound that they can cope with a bit of scrutiny and I for one will continue to study them at depth, to do any less would be to underestimate the depth of God's revelation, not only through Jesus but through Scripture.
I'm interested to know which version of the canon (and I don't mean a big black gun that fires canon balls) is correct. Is it the Protestant version, The Roman Catholic version, The Orthodox version of which I believe there are a few?
And I am probably starting to shy away from the term Christian, believing that being a Follower of Jesus is probably a more powerful and inclusive term.
Steve, who cares if she was not pure, the whole idea of Matthew's genealogy is to show that Jesus bloodline had some not so pure characters in it. Jesus himself was born under a cloud of being a "bastard" - not a nice word when we attribute it to Jesus is it. Check out some of Jesus relatives some time, purity of blood line has nothing to do with it. We know in this day and age that the genes of the mother are passed on to the offspring, so unless you are Roman Catholic and believe in the immaculate conception of Mary as well, then Mary's purity is of little concern it is Mary's willingness to be used by God even though she will face the difficulty of the stigma of being a mother carrying a child out of wedlock something that the church today still finds hard to deal with.
If we get caught up on the issues of purity then I believe we might be missing the message.
In Luke I assume the same stuff Kenneth said still applies, she was a young woman and didn't understand some things that had been going on - I'm not sure - I wasn't there. Whether or not she was actually a virgin doesn't change the meaning of the birth stories, especially when there were plenty of other people of that time being claimed to have been of virgin birth, find out the meaning behind why there were many claims of virgin births and you'll probably have your answer, there are plenty of sources around in the theological libraries.
God is an amazing God, don't you think so?
PS. I think Kenneth was being a little bit naughty. Chill out and enjoy life.
Post a Comment