Quran: Jesus crucified?

[Pentecost]

Ah, a small note: I am not one of the trained peoples that RBerman spoke of. I have done some rudimentary readings, and have philosophized to myself, and most of all asked for a divine understanding. The only quibble I have with his explanation is that I would say the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and was sent by the Son, not that He proceeds from both. It is a more Eastern understanding of the topic, and extremely minor.

[siam]

---I'm afraid I prefer rudimentary (and generalities) to scholarly---Christianity is complex and difficult and an in-depth discussion will likely be beyond my intellectual capacity.

"Holy Spirit is God but God is not just the Holy Spirit. God the Son was crucified and incarnated neither God the Father nor God the Spirit were incarnated nor were they crucified."
---the above statement is contradictory to the statement below?
"Irrelevant in the sense that it doesn't matter which person of God you say has acted, because the three are united."

---If there are 3 wills and 3 natures that all act independently of each other---then is this Tritheism?

Panentheism---Then it will be difficult to argue for exclusivity. It would imply that the Holy Spirit is accessible to all Prophets, Wisdom Teachers, Rabbi's, Gurus, Monks, Mystics, Saints....etc

As a Muslim, I can agree with John 6 and 18. (John 8 requires more clarification).

John 6.--- The Quran also calls the Prophet "a seal" and this is understood as---the last Prophet sent to humanity".....likewise the use of "seal" here could be interpreted (from a Muslim perspective) as the last Prophet to the Jews. The rest of it, if understood as referring to "spiritual food"...as in Wisdom Teachings/Guidance leading to paradise....then it would be in line with the Quran.

John 16---Muslims interpret the "helper" as referring to Prophet Muhammed. The Quran mentions the Holy Spirit upon Prophet Muhammed(pbuh). This is why for Muslims the Quran is the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Injil and 3 persons of God---Yes, I am sure it does. For Muslims the criteria is simple, Anything that clashes with Tawheed(Unity) is unacceptable, anything that aligns with Tawheed is acceptable.

....Because of this, some Christians (perhaps Miroslav Volf?---not sure???) propose an explanation of the Trinity as Tri-Unity.

@Pentecost---comment about Eastern understanding is interesting---would like to ask further but running out of time----will ask later.

[RBerman]

"Holy Spirit is God but God is not just the Holy Spirit. God the Son was crucified and incarnated neither God the Father nor God the Spirit were incarnated nor were they crucified."
---the above statement is contradictory to the statement below?
"Irrelevant in the sense that it doesn't matter which person of God you say has acted, because the three are united."

---If there are 3 wills and 3 natures that all act independently of each other---then is this Tritheism?

Panentheism---Then it will be difficult to argue for exclusivity. It would imply that the Holy Spirit is accessible to all Prophets, Wisdom Teachers, Rabbi's, Gurus, Monks, Mystics, Saints....etc

As a Muslim, I can agree with John 6 and 18. (John 8 requires more clarification).

John 6.--- The Quran also calls the Prophet "a seal" and this is understood as---the last Prophet sent to humanity".....likewise the use of "seal" here could be interpreted (from a Muslim perspective) as the last Prophet to the Jews. The rest of it, if understood as referring to "spiritual food"...as in Wisdom Teachings/Guidance leading to paradise....then it would be in line with the Quran.

John 16---Muslims interpret the "helper" as referring to Prophet Muhammed. The Quran mentions the Holy Spirit upon Prophet Muhammed(pbuh). This is why for Muslims the Quran is the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Injil and 3 persons of God---Yes, I am sure it does. For Muslims the criteria is simple, Anything that clashes with Tawheed(Unity) is unacceptable, anything that aligns with Tawheed is acceptable. ....Because of this, some Christians (perhaps Miroslav Volf?---not sure???) propose an explanation of the Trinity as Tri-Unity.

Yes, "Trinity" is a coined term which means "Tri-Unity." Christians emphasize both the unity of God and the three persons, because that is what the injil reveals. The Holy Spirit indwells all true followers of God, who confess Jesus as the Son of God (not in a sexual sense, but in true essence) whose death and resurrection result in the forgiveness of our sins.

The three persons of God have a single, divine will, by virtue of being one God. They are never at odds with each other. The Son possesses two natures: The nature of God, and a human nature, by virtue of his incarnation as the man, Jesus Christ.

I am impressed that you took the time to read those excerpts from the injil according to John. You are correct that the food of which Jesus spoke was spiritual food. But it consists not just of his message, but of his person. Jesus did not come to show the way. Jesus came to be the way, like a man who lays down his own body across a chasm, so that others may walk across on his back. Only through spiritual union with Jesus, by faith, can we be saved from the wrath our sins merit. And of course we will order our lives in conformity with the life of Jesus as well, but that is not what saves us.

Concerning John 16: An interpretation of the "helper" as being Muhammad, hundreds of years later, seems highly anachronistic. In the passage as a whole, it's clear that Jesus is talking about God's own Spirit, which fell on Jesus' disciples not long after he had ascended back to heaven following his death and resurrection:

When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. (from Acts of the Apostles, chapter 2)

The disciples then began speaking the truth boldly, performing miracles, and convicting men of sin, just as Jesus had foretold in John 16.

Let me know what questions you have about John 8. To prime the pump: You probably know that in Middle Eastern culture, to be a "Son of..." something is not a sexual matter, but rather indicates close affiliation. Jesus upset the Jews by calling himself the "Son of God," and he told the Pharisees that their lies made them "sons of the Devil." Over the course of Jesus' work and teaching as recorded in the injil, Jesus revealed the unprecedently close affiliation he had with God: He was not merely a prophet. He was actually God incarnate, walking the land, living perfectly, performing wonders.

[Pentecost]

---I'm afraid I prefer rudimentary (and generalities) to scholarly---Christianity is complex and difficult and an in-depth discussion will likely be beyond my intellectual capacity.

The Trinty itself beyond saying something to the effect of "The Father, Son, and Spirit are God and God is one." Is a very scholarly subject.

"Holy Spirit is God but God is not just the Holy Spirit. God the Son was crucified and incarnated neither God the Father nor God the Spirit were incarnated nor were they crucified."
---the above statement is contradictory to the statement below?
"Irrelevant in the sense that it doesn't matter which person of God you say has acted, because the three are united."

---If there are 3 wills and 3 natures that all act independently of each other---then is this Tritheism?

There is one will and one nature, and one being. But we have seen if express itself in three forms, that of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit there is a definite Oneness to the Christian God, BUT the three expressions have interacted with one another, the Son praying to the Father, the Father blessing the Son with the Spirit, the Spirit being upon the Son, the Son sending the Spirit. But all of these things were done in perfect unity and agreement. They are one being with three personalities.

Panentheism---Then it will be difficult to argue for exclusivity. It would imply that the Holy Spirit is accessible to all Prophets, Wisdom Teachers, Rabbi's, Gurus, Monks, Mystics, Saints....etc

That is one of the reasons I said it was not quite right. God is not His creation, He is not a tree nor is He the sun. However, in the OT He chose to inhabit the Ark of the Covenant, in the Gospels (injil?) we see the Son take the form of Jesus, and the Spirit seemed like a dove (but was not incarnated). In the OT and the NT the Holy Spirit would "fill" prophets, or the "hand of God" would be upon them, the Holy Spirit was present but not physically. And He (the Spirit) exists within Christians, so that while God exists outside of His creation, He places Himself within it to be personal with His people.

As a Muslim, I can agree with John 6 and 18. (John 8 requires more clarification).

John 6.--- The Quran also calls the Prophet "a seal" and this is understood as---the last Prophet sent to humanity".....likewise the use of "seal" here could be interpreted (from a Muslim perspective) as the last Prophet to the Jews. The rest of it, if understood as referring to "spiritual food"...as in Wisdom Teachings/Guidance leading to paradise....then it would be in line with the Quran.

John 16---Muslims interpret the "helper" as referring to Prophet Muhammed. The Quran mentions the Holy Spirit upon Prophet Muhammed(pbuh). This is why for Muslims the Quran is the teachings of Jesus Christ.

I completely agree with RBerman here, and I have nothing to add.

...Because of this, some Christians (perhaps Miroslav Volf?---not sure???) propose an explanation of the Trinity as Tri-Unity.

Trinity = Tri-Unity.

@Pentecost---comment about Eastern understanding is interesting---would like to ask further but running out of time----will ask later.

Well, I think I might be able to answer it now. At the Council of Nicaea in AD 325 Christians met to find the consensus on several controversial topics. Everything found to be of significance was formed into a creed. It was amended by the Western church in AD 381. I prefer the original, but there is little difference either way for me because my tradition does not recite any creeds.

[siam]

Nature of God---Tawheed (Unity) and its simplest expression---One God---is a concept that can be understood easily by children. Yet, at the same time, in its nuances it is also intellectually satisfying to scholars. If we posit that all humanity with its varying degrees of intellectual capacity are creations of God, then, it follows that the core message/Guidance of God should be understandable to all levels of the intellect as well as being consistent and constant throughout time.

Anachronistic---Since Christians re-interpret the Torah, Muslims can re-interpret the NT and just as Jews do not accept the Christian re-interpretation, Christians do not need to accept any Muslim understanding of the NT.
However, neither the Torah nor the NT are theologically important to Muslims. We deeply respect these books because the Quran requests us to, but their contents (though helpful) are not necessary in understanding Quran/Islam/Tawheed.

If God is One (as in unity) then one would expect the "Tri-Unity" to be crucified, but it is not....perhaps it is one of many mysteries....?......

"son of..."---If "son of..." indicates close afilliation---it need not neccessarily mean incarnation. As a Muslim, I can affirm the close affilliation of Jesus Christ with God's will---without incarnation.

Blood of Christ---Eucharist?

The deal/promise---Surah 3 verse 31---"Say: If you do love God and follow me: God will love you and forgive you your sins for God is oft-forgiving and most merciful". ----It is constant and consistent throughout time.
"Jesus did not come to show the way. Jesus came to be the way,"----If "be the way" is understood as the (living) application of God's Guidance and will---then this is acceptable understanding to me as a Muslim (The Prophet also applied the principles of God's guidance and this is recorded in the Sunna)

If Holy Spirit is already used by a God "outside of His creation, He places Himself within it to be personal with His people."(Pentecost)---- then why use incarnation for the same purpose....."He was actually God incarnate, walking the land, living perfectly, performing wonders. " (RBerman)....?........

In Judaism and Islam, Holy Spirit (Ruh-al-Qudus =arabic, Ruach HaKodesh=Hebrew) or Spirit (ruh/ruach) are/is not God. The concept of incarnation conflicts with Tawheed, but since Holy Spirit is not an incarnation---exploring a possibility of similarity was interesting.

There is a hadith Qudsi that says (meanings understood symbolically)----
"Neither my heavens nor my earth can hold me, but the heart of my servant, the believer, can contain me"

Eastern Church---Thanks for the explanation.
It is my understanding that the Eastern/Oriental Churches do not have original sin...? also, it is my understanding that the Oriental Churches used a direct translation of the hebrew Torah...don't know if this still applies though........

[Pentecost]

Nature of God---Tawheed (Unity) and its simplest expression---One God---is a concept that can be understood easily by children. Yet, at the same time, in its nuances it is also intellectually satisfying to scholars. If we posit that all humanity with its varying degrees of intellectual capacity are creations of God, then, it follows that the core message/Guidance of God should be understandable to all levels of the intellect as well as being consistent and constant throughout time.

Indeed at its most basic the Trinity is about the Oneness of God, but you ask after the scholarly understanding and then ask for me to provide the rudimentary. It is very simple! "God is One!" The deeper is not the "what" of God, but the "who" and the yet deeper, "how." What is God? One being that is the creator of the heavens and the earth. Who? The Living God of Israel. How? In three persons, co-equal, co-eternal, in perfect unity.

Anachronistic---Since Christians re-interpret the Torah, Muslims can re-interpret the NT and just as Jews do not accept the Christian re-interpretation, Christians do not need to accept any Muslim understanding of the NT.
However, neither the Torah nor the NT are theologically important to Muslims. We deeply respect these books because the Quran requests us to, but their contents (though helpful) are not necessary in understanding Quran/Islam/Tawheed.

Neither myself, nor RBerman have made comment on this that I have noticed, we are merely proceeding as this thread has for multiple pages, explanatory of our beliefs.

If God is One (as in unity) then one would expect the "Tri-Unity" to be crucified, but it is not....perhaps it is one of many mysteries....?......

You ask how I can say the Son did "such and such" but not the Father? Because they are different people. This might be a poor explanation but imagine, there are triplets, they are identical motivations and nature, they are all born of their parents and they are from the outside the same. Now imagine they have no parents and have always existed. Three identical people who are the same in all ways and who have always known each other and are closer than anyone else. Now imagine they do not need to speak but merely think at each other, but they have always known each other they don't need to communicate because they already know what the other two are thinking so deep is their connection that the three are always united. Now remove the body. They are three people but the same being. Now think, when you Siam wish to for example type, your eyes perform one action, your hands a second, and your mind a third, but they all lead to your goal. So too with God, except from the outside it doesn't matter which person does which action. The only reason we know there is a distinction is because He told us so.

Blood of Christ---Eucharist?

It is not what I call it, but yes, that.

The deal/promise---Surah 3 verse 31---"Say: If you do love God and follow me: God will love you and forgive you your sins for God is oft-forgiving and most merciful". ----It is constant and consistent throughout time.

Indeed, and the Incarnation was the means by which it occurred. While we may say it took place in such and such year, God has always experienced it nonlinearly.

"Jesus did not come to show the way. Jesus came to be the way,"----If "be the way" is understood as the (living) application of God's Guidance and will---then this is acceptable understanding to me as a Muslim (The Prophet also applied the principles of God's guidance and this is recorded in the Sunna)

When you wish to go somewhere you do not just appear there, you must travel[an action] a path. So too, The Lord chose Incarnation[an action] to bring Mankind into peace with Him, but because God is independent of our history, He has always been Jesus, before, during and after that century.

If Holy Spirit is already used by a God "outside of His creation, He places Himself within it to be personal with His people."(Pentecost)---- then why use incarnation for the same purpose....."He was actually God incarnate, walking the land, living perfectly, performing wonders. " (RBerman)....?........

Incarnation was not just to be with His people, it was primarily for eschatological reasons, which I've mentioned several times before.

Eastern Church---Thanks for the explanation.
It is my understanding that the Eastern/Oriental Churches do not have original sin...? also, it is my understanding that the Oriental Churches used a direct translation of the hebrew Torah...don't know if this still applies though........

Original sin is stressed the most by the Reformed (a Western tradition) but all agree that sin seperates each and every person from God and that without His intervention we neither could nor would want to seek to.

Translations: A large part of the Protestant Reformation was a movement towards translating from the Masoretic texts into the native languages instead of using the Latin Vulgate which was based off the older Greek Septuagint.

[RBerman]

Anachronistic---Since Christians re-interpret the Torah, Muslims can re-interpret the NT and just as Jews do not accept the Christian re-interpretation, Christians do not need to accept any Muslim understanding of the NT. However, neither the Torah nor the NT are theologically important to Muslims. We deeply respect these books because the Quran requests us to, but their contents (though helpful) are not necessary in understanding Quran/Islam/Tawheed.

I do not see how you can truly respect Torah and injil yet also say they are neither important nor necessary. That sounds like lip-service, not true respect. If a parent told a child to do something, and the child politely said, "I will not," would that really be respect?

If God is One (as in unity) then one would expect the "Tri-Unity" to be crucified, but it is not....perhaps it is one of many mysteries....?......

That's an example of keeping the "tri" part and the "unity" part. If one asked, "Since Jesus died, and Jesus is God, did God die?" the answer would be, "In a sense yes, but in another sense no."

"son of..."---If "son of..." indicates close afilliation---it need not neccessarily mean incarnation. As a Muslim, I can affirm the close affilliation of Jesus Christ with God's will---without incarnation.

That's true. The phrase "Son of..." by itself would not have to mean incarnation. However, in the particular way that Jesus applied the term to himself, and as God further revealed his purposes through other prophets, it became clear that Jesus' special Sonship was a matter of divine incarnation.

Blood of Christ---Eucharist?

The Eucharist is a picture of what Christ's sacrifice accomplished. The power is in the actual sacrifice, not in specifically in the blood spilt during it, nor in the Eucharist which symbolizes the blood.

The deal/promise---Surah 3 verse 31---"Say: If you do love God and follow me: God will love you and forgive you your sins for God is oft-forgiving and most merciful". ----It is constant and consistent throughout time. "Jesus did not come to show the way. Jesus came to be the way,"----If "be the way" is understood as the (living) application of God's Guidance and will---then this is acceptable understanding to me as a Muslim (The Prophet also applied the principles of God's guidance and this is recorded in the Sunna)

That is not what I am saying. That is making Jesus into simply a teacher and a model to emulate. He is those things, but our sins are not forgiven through emulation of Jesus' good works. Forgiveness comes because Jesus himself satisfied God's requirements on our behalf, through his perfect life, death, and resurrection. God is too perfect and holy for our own deeds to ever be good enough to deserve his forgiveness.

If Holy Spirit is already used by a God "outside of His creation, He places Himself within it to be personal with His people."(Pentecost)---- then why use incarnation for the same purpose....."He was actually God incarnate, walking the land, living perfectly, performing wonders. " (RBerman)?

The Holy Spirit did not live a perfect human life, and die, and rise again. That was the purpose of Jesus' incarnation. The Holy Spirit empowers God's people to trust in Christ. The Holy Spirit unites God's people spiritually to Jesus, so that Jesus' accomplishments are reckoned to be theirs. The Holy Spirit indwells believers, inspiring in them both a desire and ability to live in accordance with God's will and Christ's example.

In Judaism and Islam, Holy Spirit (Ruh-al-Qudus =arabic, Ruach HaKodesh=Hebrew) or Spirit (ruh/ruach) are/is not God. The concept of incarnation conflicts with Tawheed, but since Holy Spirit is not an incarnation---exploring a possibility of similarity was interesting.

I can see how the Trinity taught in the injil conflicts with Islam's idea of Tahweed. As I read the Qur'an, its explanations of Christian belief do not match up with what Christians actually believe. For instance, the sonship of Jesus is not a sexual matter. The Trinity does not consist of The Father, the Son, and Mary. Mary is not Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron. And so on.

[siam]

@Pentecost
Explanation of our beliefs---I do enjoy the exploration and apologize if I caused confusion.

Nature of God---Typing analogy.....If understood that the consiousness wills an action that the brain, eyes hands perform---then there is a similar concept in Islam. God (Force) can use created agents (forces) such as Angels and Spirit...and other.... to translate his "will" into "action". (However, these created agents (forces)are not God)
Attributes---The Islamic concept of "attributes" explains the many facets of God/nature of God. Attributes are understood/called "names" (see concept of 99 names of God) such as Anger, Justice, Compassion....etc. These "attributes"(names) are not finite because God cannot be contained by human mind/language. The number 99 is used to denote the infiniteness of God's names.

eschatology/soteriology---do these concepts overlap in your tradition?
I don't know much about Islamic eschatology as it is not an area of interest..........

You mentioned your tradition does not have a creed---does this mean the concept of Trinity has more flexibility of interpretation in your tradition?



@RBerman

Torah/Injil --- I do not understand why the OT is attached to the NT in Christianity---I suppose it is important for theological reasons?---But for Muslims, the Quranic theology is self sufficient and no other sacred texts are necessary in understanding it.

"If a parent told a child to do something, and the child politely said, "I will not," would that really be respect?"
---In the Islamic/Quranic framework blind obedience and blind faith are discouraged. The Quran says that if a Parent requests something that goes against morality/ethics---then the child must decline the request. Like wise, the Quran also says to believe simply because it is "the tradition of the fathers" or someone said so, or because of coincidental occurances...etc is superstition not faith(Iman)

Faith(Iman) = the use of ones intellect and reason to arrive at (heartfelt) conviction.
including--- a) intellectual assent to certain propositions
b) engagement in just actions

Sonship---Even without sexual connotations, incarnation as a concept conflicts with Tawheed.
Theotokos---the concept of Mary(pbuh) as "Mother of God" would also conflict with Tawheed on the same grounds as incarantion.

Quran---In Judaism, Miriam the sister of Prophet Moses was a "Prophet" because she heard God. The Quran compares Mary the mother of Jesus Christ to the sister of Prophet Moses to denote the high status of both women.

[RBerman]

You mentioned your tradition does not have a creed---does this mean the concept of Trinity has more flexibility of interpretation in your tradition?

Every faith subgroup has a creed, a set of common beliefs. It may not be formalized into a specific formula used in worship, however, which is probably what he has in mind.

Torah/Injil --- I do not understand why the OT is attached to the NT in Christianity---I suppose it is important for theological reasons?---But for Muslims, the Quranic theology is self sufficient and no other sacred texts are necessary in understanding it.

And yet, the Qur'an itself instructs its readers to use the Torah and Injil, so surely a faithful Muslim would eagerly submit in this area. The stories of biblical characters to which the Qur'an alludes (Jesus, Adam, Moses, etc.) assume prior knowledge of the Bible's explanations of their lives, which are fuller both in detail as well as in framing context.

"If a parent told a child to do something, and the child politely said, "I will not," would that really be respect?" ---In the Islamic/Quranic framework blind obedience and blind faith are discouraged. The Quran says that if a Parent requests something that goes against morality/ethics---then the child must decline the request. Like wise, the Quran also says to believe simply because it is "the tradition of the fathers" or someone said so, or because of coincidental occurances...etc is superstition not faith(Iman)

That is not my point. My point is that I do not see in what sense you respect the Bible and yet think it is unnecessary. That sounds like the opposite of respect.

Sonship---Even without sexual connotations, incarnation as a concept conflicts with Tawheed. Theotokos---the concept of Mary(pbuh) as "Mother of God" would also conflict with Tawheed on the same grounds as incarantion.

I can see how that would be a difficult subject to grasp. It has no parallel in our own lives, so we have no frame of reference. The challenge is to be able to put aside our own experience in a situation to which it is not relevant.

Quran---In Judaism, Miriam the sister of Prophet Moses was a "Prophet" because she heard God. The Quran compares Mary the mother of Jesus Christ to the sister of Prophet Moses to denote the high status of both women.

Surah 19:27-28 At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: 'O Mary! Truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!

The most straightforward reading of Surah 19 is that Mary (mother of Jesus) is claimed to be the sister of Aaron (Miriam, who lived and died 1200 years before). You appear to be saying that this Surah should be taken poetically, so that the linkage between Mary and Aaron is a metaphorical one, intended as an honorific. That seems like a post hoc rationalization, and I'm not aware of any other instances of "sister of Aaron" ever used as an honorific, but let's assume it's correct for the moment.

Surah 3:35-37 Behold! When the wife of Imran said: 'O my Lord! I do dedicate unto Thee what is in my womb for Thy special service: So accept this of me: for Thou hearest and knowest all things.' When she was delivered, she said: 'O my Lord! Behold! I am delivered of a female child!'--And Allah knew best what she brought forth--'And no wise is the male like the female. I have named her Mary, and I commend her and her offspring to Thy protection from the Evil One, the Rejected.' So her Lord accepted her with good acceptance and caused her to grow in a good manner and put her in the care of Zechariah. Every time Zechariah entered upon her in the prayer chamber, he found with her provision. He said, "O Mary, from where is this [coming] to you?" She said, "It is from Allah. Indeed, Allah provides for whom He wills without account."

Surah 3 includes a historical account of Mary's visit to Zechariah. It claims that Imran (the father of Moses, Miriam, and Aaron according to 1 Chronicles 6 in the Old Testament) is the father of Mary, 1200 years later. One might claim that Mary, as well as Miriam, had a father named Imran. That seems much more complicated than the more likely explanation that the Qur'an is simply incorrect; two characters with very similar names ("Mary" is a form of "Miriam") were confused by an author who did not know the Bible well, so that the lineage of Miriam was incorrectly attributed to Mary. This is exactly the sort of reason that familiarity with the Torah and Injil

[siam]

@RBerman.
Christians have their way of doing things, we Muslims have our way of doing things. We do not read the Quran with the Bible......in fact, most of us have never read the Bible at all. We read the Quran with Tafsir.

Since there appears to be a misunderstanding, let me explain in more detail.......

Quran---The Quran was revealed over an approx 20 year period and some verses are specific to the time-period and circumstances of the particular community, other verses are more general and not time-specific. The purpose of the Quran is to Guide and therefore it sets up ethico-moral principles. The Quran is poetic but not poetry and it uses many literary devices. Also, Arabic, like Hebrew has a root word system which adds a depth of meaning to words. That is why a translation of the Quran is not considered The Quran---it is considered exegesis. As the Quran itself suggests in Surah 3 verse 7 (and elsewhere), some verses of the Quran can be understood in its plain meaning others have deeper and/or multiple meaning. That is why Muslims read the Quran with Tafsir.

Many of the first converts to Islam were Polytheist Meccans. The Torah and Injil were not a part of their tradition. Today, the largest section of Muslims are in the East,--- Central Asia, Subcontinent, South East and Far East. About 60% of the 1.5 billion Muslims reside in this geographic region. India and China are the largest countries with ancient civilization. They are NOT Christian countries and the Torah/Injil do not play a part in these traditions. The Torah/Injil have never been necessary to understanding the Quran, then and now.
Those converts from a Jewish or Christian background may bring knowledge and insight---which is welcome---but these must conform to Tawheed to be generally acceptable as "right belief".

What does the Quran mean when it refers "Torah/Injil" (Quran also refers to Zabur = Pslams) ? ---It refers to "scripture". The Bible has different compositions depending on which Christianity is using it. For example, the Ethiopian Church has more books, the Syrian Church had the Peshitta and the Diatesaron (a harmony of the 4 gospels).....etc Apart from this there is the Apocrypha also.
Among Muslim scholars there is a difference of opinion as to what exactly the Quranic use of "Taurat", "Zabur", and "Injil" comprises of. My opinion is that the Quranic usage implies ALL "scripture" including the various "books", the Talmud (both Yerushalmi and Balvi), the Midrash the Apocrypha as well as all the various Gospels. (the reason for my opinion is that the Quran uses a wide variety of sources---not only what is considered "canonical" by a certain group)

The Quran does not require its readers to have ANY prior knowledge---the pursuit of knowledge is highly recommended---however, this pursuit is not confined to other scriptures alone but includes all branches of knowledge such as history, philosophy science...etc in order to understand the Quran better.

Surah 3:35 ---according to my Tafsir, the specific Arabic word "wife" can have two understandings---as in descendant of (house of Imran) and spouse. In this particular case, both meaning can apply as the lady in question (the Mother) was both a descendant of the house of Imran and also the wife of a person named Imran..........this is because the two names happen to be the same. (Tafsir of Muhammed Asad is online---I use Yusuf Ali)

What the NT says does not matter as the point of this story is to show that Mary, Mother of Jesus Christ was under God's protection from birth and gender does not enter into consideration of whom God gives his blessings and responsibilities. This story of Mary, Mother of Jesus Christ precedes the stories of the the birth of John the Baptist (verse 39) and the birth of Jesus Christ (verse 45).....a lot is lost in translation, but the Quran uses similar language in all 3 stories so that all are interwoven together creating an interesting symbolism.

Generally, the Quran omits a lot of details---The Quran is a much smaller book than the Bible and its purpose is not to tell stories---rather it is to give Guidance.

[RBerman]

Christians have their way of doing things, we Muslims have our way of doing things. We do not read the Quran with the Bible......in fact, most of us have never read the Bible at all. We read the Quran with Tafsir. Since there appears to be a misunderstanding, let me explain in more detail.

Quran---The Quran was revealed over an approx 20 year period and some verses are specific to the time-period and circumstances of the particular community, other verses are more general and not time-specific. The purpose of the Quran is to Guide and therefore it sets up ethico-moral principles. The Quran is poetic but not poetry and it uses many literary devices. Also, Arabic, like Hebrew has a root word system which adds a depth of meaning to words. That is why a translation of the Quran is not considered The Quran---it is considered exegesis. As the Quran itself suggests in Surah 3 verse 7 (and elsewhere), some verses of the Quran can be understood in its plain meaning others have deeper and/or multiple meaning. That is why Muslims read the Quran with Tafsir.

I must say that it seems to this non-Muslim that on this matter, tafsir cloud the clear meaning of the Qur'an, making it say what it does not say, and not say what it does say.

Surah 3:35 ---according to my Tafsir, the specific Arabic word "wife" can have two understandings---as in descendant of (house of Imran) and spouse. In this particular case, both meaning can apply as the lady in question (the Mother) was both a descendant of the house of Imran and also the wife of a person named Imran..........this is because the two names happen to be the same. (Tafsir of Muhammed Asad is online---I use Yusuf Ali)

"According to my tafsir..." Am I to understand that you do not actually speak Arabic yourself, to attest how this word is actually used by Arabic speakers? At any rate, I do not understand the relevance of your comment. Surah 3:35-36 is a narrative portion, in which Imran and his "wife" discuss the fact that his wife has given birth to a child who will be named Mary. Surely you're not suggesting that Imran (father of Moses, Aaron, and Miriam) is discussing the matter with his descendant (Mary's mother) 1200 years in the future? I can see how one committed to the truth of the Qur'an needs to find some way to explain the discrepancy, but this one does not ring true.

Generally, the Quran omits a lot of details---The Quran is a much smaller book than the Bible and its purpose is not to tell stories---rather it is to give Guidance.

Christians and Jews believe that the stories of God's activities among his people do provide Guidance. We know who God is, in part, by the sorts of things he does. Remember all the verses I quoted which asserted that God has "steadfast love," and then cited some specific thing God had done to show his love? I can imagine how the Bible's narrative portions might seem strange to those only accustomed to reading the Qur'an, which lacks such contextual passages and thus relies on a whole host of conflicting ancillary accounts in order to make sense of the order and occasion of the Surahs.

[Pentecost]

@Pentecost
Explanation of our beliefs---I do enjoy the exploration and apologize if I caused confusion.

Any issue is forgotten. I have only recently returned from a "church camp," which is a retreat to an isolated location where Christians may come together and spend time praying, worshipping, and studying our Scriptures. This particular one was intended for students ages 11-17 or so, and I attended in the role of a mentor to some of the students, I say this as way of explanation for my absence.

Nature of God---Typing analogy.....If understood that the consiousness wills an action that the brain, eyes hands perform---then there is a similar concept in Islam. God (Force) can use created agents (forces) such as Angels and Spirit...and other.... to translate his "will" into "action". (However, these created agents (forces)are not God)
Attributes---The Islamic concept of "attributes" explains the many facets of God/nature of God. Attributes are understood/called "names" (see concept of 99 names of God) such as Anger, Justice, Compassion....etc. These "attributes"(names) are not finite because God cannot be contained by human mind/language. The number 99 is used to denote the infiniteness of God's names.

I do not know if you understood the point I was trying to make, but I see some similarity between these "99 names" and the Jewish Hasidic tradition, but I do not know that much about either sort of thing.

eschatology/soteriology---do these concepts overlap in your tradition?
I don't know much about Islamic eschatology as it is not an area of interest..........

Soteriology is the study of salvation, eschatology is the study of the end times. For me as an individual the two are very closely related in that who is saved will have a particular role in the end times, and that Jesus's act of salvation was a neccessary step towards the prophesied end times.

You mentioned your tradition does not have a creed---does this mean the concept of Trinity has more flexibility of interpretation in your tradition?

I'm afraid I must have mispoke, we have a creed, my organization holds to a "Statement of Fundameral Truths" but we do not recite it, nor do we recite the Athanasian Creed, the Nicene Creed, nor the Apostle's Creed. Our understanding of the Trinity is the same as that of other members of the historic Christianity. Interestingly, at the inception of my organizations founding, The Assemblies of God, we had a "New Issue" brought up, a rehashing of an ancient heresy of Christianity known as Modalism which is I believe similar to your Tawheed, it denies that there is a difference between the Father, the Son, and the Spirit and that they are simply outward expressions of a united God. If you are curious of that group perhaps you might wish to look up "Oneness Pentecostalism" which I and other members of historic Christianity reject as heretical primarily due to their rejection of the Trinity (along with other errors).

RBerman was correct when he suggested that we do not use it in worship and that that was what I meant.

Torah/Injil --- I do not understand why the OT is attached to the NT in Christianity---I suppose it is important for theological reasons?---But for Muslims, the Quranic theology is self sufficient and no other sacred texts are necessary in understanding it.

The Old Testament is the word of God and the New Testament is also the word of God. Neither is higher than the other.

[siam]

@ Pentecost

Nature of God---I understood, I was only attempting to show the difference in nuance. I don't know about Hasidic Judaism---but I would agree that Islam is very similar to Judaism.

Modalism/Monadism---No, Neither. Tawheed is pretty much what the Shema (Judasim) is. Any Christian concept based on 3 regardless, of the 3 being same, different, or both same and different at the same time---would NOT work with Tawheed. Monadism (indivisible God) may appear close to the Islamic concept of Tawheed but it also does not fit either. When Muslims say One God---the "One" does not denote a numeral/number rather it has connotations of Uniqueness.

eschatology---There are many types of eschatology in Christianity? which type do you follow?
I can speak about Islamic soteriology, the Quran has a lot to say about it---but I think our eschatology is probably pretty much the same as (Eastern/Oriental) Christianity...?.... but don't know.....

Church Camp---Did you have any interesting discussion? Is this more or less a regular ritual?
In Islam, Ramadan (month of fasting) is the time when we go through spiritual renewal---(It is also a time of cleansing of both the body and spirit)

[siam]

@ RBerman

Tafsir---We will have to agree to disagree on Tafsir.

However, it is possible your opinion might be based on some misunderstanding so I will attempt to give a simple background on Tafsir:- (for more info search "Tafsir")

To Muslims, the Quran is a revelation. This means that the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) is not considered its author. The Quran itself encourages the pursuit of knowledge as well as reflection on its verses and asking questions. During the time of its revelation (approx 20 yr period) questions were asked, and discussions took place. Some questions were answered by the Quran---this would be revelation. Some verses were explained by the Prophet. These are collected in a body of work called ahadith (Sayings of the Prophet). Some of these were the first Tafsir (explanations) (The sayings of the Prophet are NOT revelation/Quran).
Other things that help to put the Quran in context are the Sira (Biography of the Prophet) and the Sunna (the way of the Prophet). Semantics, literary analysis, and interpretations of metaphors, symbolism...etc were added by scholars. Tafsir makes it easy for average Muslims like me to understand the Quran in context. However, it is not a requirement for a Muslim to read the Quran with Tafsir as the Quran is internally consistent and it defines its own concept words.

aHadith---These are a collection of the "sayings" of the Prophet. They were collected many years after his death and so they have varying degrees of authenticity depending on their chain of narration. Context is very important in understanding hadith otherwise it distorts the meaning/intent. (Dr Jonathan Brown explains the topic on the net)



Do Christians have many exegesis? If so, are there any particular ones you use/favor?

Arabic---I am not an Arab (I live in the East) so I feel lucky that I can read Quranic Arabic. I do not speak any Arabic dialects.

Imran---it seems to me you are under the impression that in all of history, there is only one person that is called Imran?

[Pentecost]

@ Pentecost

Nature of God---I understood, I was only attempting to show the difference in nuance. I don't know about Hasidic Judaism---but I would agree that Islam is very similar to Judaism.

Modalism/Monadism---No, Neither. Tawheed is pretty much what the Shema (Judasim) is. Any Christian concept based on 3 regardless, of the 3 being same, different, or both same and different at the same time---would NOT work with Tawheed. Monadism (indivisible God) may appear close to the Islamic concept of Tawheed but it also does not fit either. When Muslims say One God---the "One" does not denote a numeral/number rather it has connotations of Uniqueness.

If it were only a question of there being one unique deity, that can be affirmed by Trinitarians. But I do not care to speak for the Oneness, I strongly reject them.

eschatology---There are many types of eschatology in Christianity? which type do you follow?
I can speak about Islamic soteriology, the Quran has a lot to say about it---but I think our eschatology is probably pretty much the same as (Eastern/Oriental) Christianity...?.... but don't know.....

Christian eschatology is divided on whether certain prophecies have occurred yet, or if they will occur more than once. I basically believe that one day Jesus will come back to rescue Christians from a 3 1/2 year long tribulation with natural disasters, and false prophets and other terrible things. Then Christ and His servants will come defeat and bind Satan and his minions. We will rule for one thousand years, then Satan will be released from from his prison and deceive the nations. Then the devil and his highest allies will be thrown into the Lake of Fire which is the second death. Then non-Christians will be raised from the dead and all peoples will be judged. Then Death itself will be thrown into the Lake followed by non-Christians. Lastly, a new Heaven and new Earth will be created, and God will be with His people and we will be His people and He will be our God. The final sentence is the entire reason for history as far as I can tell.

Church Camp---Did you have any interesting discussion?

Yes, the teachings were primarily about sexual purity and personal holiness. Note: Males and females were separated for this. We do not normally have different religious teachings for the different genders, my organization is one of the few that ordains women as clergy.

Is this more or less a regular ritual?

It is not prescribed by our Scriptures but we choose to meet together about three times a year for the "Youth" more or less depending on the age group involved.

In Islam, Ramadan (month of fasting) is the time when we go through spiritual renewal---(It is also a time of cleansing of both the body and spirit)

If an individual believes they are in need of such a thing they may undergo intense prayer and/or fasting. The above mentioned events are good opportunities for such things.