Originally posted by Dan Zebiri
View Post
Actually, NO Christian is making such assumptions that you are talking about (below), siam. Its just you making misplaced presumptions again, about what you assume of the Christians!
The church councils from Nicea 325 AD, Ephesus 431 AD, etc which all predate Muhamed and the invention of 6th century Islam NEVER endorsed, confessed or taught in any measure, Mary-worship. Giving her titles is totally something else, and never amounted to praying to her in worship by the orthodox Christian church.
So sura 5/116 is already wrong in its error to assume that Jesus taught or said to His disciples to worship me (Jesus) and my mother (Mary) as two gods besides God/Allah..
Who are these people that the Koran refers to, other than the followers of Jesus Christ as 5/116 EXPLICITLY addresses? Are they muslims, Jews, Hindus or Zoroastrians??
But there isnt any command or injunction taught by the Bible and canonical Gospels to worship Mary, unlike what 5/116 wrongly and falsely assumes!
The Koran does erroneously and grossly misrepresent Christian and Biblical orthodoxy at THIS point.
The Holy Trinity is about God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
Your failure and inability to grasp or understand this truth about God does NOT invalidate the Trinity at all!
As to the worship of Jesus Christ the Son of God, I already showed previously how the Lord Jesus accepted worship from His followers in John 20 v.28. Like, from Thomas who addressed Jesus as my Lord and my GOD. If Jesus was not divine and human in Himself, He would have repudiated such worship from Thomas and scolded or rebuked him for blasphemy and breaching monotheism. But Jesus did no such thing.
Instead, Jesus willingly accepted, welcomed and endorsed the worship given to Him by Thomas and the other disciples.
The divine nature of Jesus the Son of God is inherent in the canonical Gospels. All His closest and earliest companions acknowledged it.
There is no need for researchers to learn anything substantially thematic from the Koran about the authentic Jesus Christ. It came 700 hundred years AFTER the FACT of the historical Jesus Christ.
The canonical Gospels are far and away much more reliable than the Koran to learn from and discover the real and truly authentic identity and nature of Jesus Christ.
As the historian and scholar J.J. Saunders said about the Quran:
So, in terms of facts of history, many objective and intellectual reputable scholars have already rejected the Koran as a historical or reliable source in any measure.
The church councils from Nicea 325 AD, Ephesus 431 AD, etc which all predate Muhamed and the invention of 6th century Islam NEVER endorsed, confessed or taught in any measure, Mary-worship. Giving her titles is totally something else, and never amounted to praying to her in worship by the orthodox Christian church.
So sura 5/116 is already wrong in its error to assume that Jesus taught or said to His disciples to worship me (Jesus) and my mother (Mary) as two gods besides God/Allah..
Who are these people that the Koran refers to, other than the followers of Jesus Christ as 5/116 EXPLICITLY addresses? Are they muslims, Jews, Hindus or Zoroastrians??
But there isnt any command or injunction taught by the Bible and canonical Gospels to worship Mary, unlike what 5/116 wrongly and falsely assumes!
The Koran does erroneously and grossly misrepresent Christian and Biblical orthodoxy at THIS point.
The Holy Trinity is about God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
Your failure and inability to grasp or understand this truth about God does NOT invalidate the Trinity at all!
As to the worship of Jesus Christ the Son of God, I already showed previously how the Lord Jesus accepted worship from His followers in John 20 v.28. Like, from Thomas who addressed Jesus as my Lord and my GOD. If Jesus was not divine and human in Himself, He would have repudiated such worship from Thomas and scolded or rebuked him for blasphemy and breaching monotheism. But Jesus did no such thing.
Instead, Jesus willingly accepted, welcomed and endorsed the worship given to Him by Thomas and the other disciples.
The divine nature of Jesus the Son of God is inherent in the canonical Gospels. All His closest and earliest companions acknowledged it.
There is no need for researchers to learn anything substantially thematic from the Koran about the authentic Jesus Christ. It came 700 hundred years AFTER the FACT of the historical Jesus Christ.
The canonical Gospels are far and away much more reliable than the Koran to learn from and discover the real and truly authentic identity and nature of Jesus Christ.
As the historian and scholar J.J. Saunders said about the Quran:
Its pattern and form, doubtful and questionable sources, together with the uncertain and questionable dates of their surahs, make the Quran a most UNRELIABLE source of historical facts.
JJ Saunders, A History of Medieval Islam, (London: Routledge, 1972), 18-20.
So, in terms of facts of history, many objective and intellectual reputable scholars have already rejected the Koran as a historical or reliable source in any measure.
The Quran is not a history book---it does not claim to be a history book---historians that look to the Quran as a source of history/historical information do so of their own discretion.
Comment