Allah, And Why I Am Not A Muslim, just wondering. Options

[Sol Invictus]

first off, let me say that if i've posted this in the wrong section then i apologize and wouldn't mind it at all if this were deleted or moved.

my question is how a muslim would respond to the following article:

http://godomnipotent.wordpress.com/2010/11...m-not-a-muslim/

while i agree with the article, i simply want to know whether or not it holds up to scrutiny.

This post has been edited by Sol Invictus: Dec 7 2010, 06:25 AM

[Nazia1987]

Hi Sol Invictus. Interesting article. I think the thing is, I and anyone on here could easily ask you the same thing about how you could stand being a Christian.

The way I am a Muslim is probably the same way you were a Christian. There are some things that bother me, say for example the ability to own slaves, etc. But I realize the time periods this comes from and I accept that it was a different time and move on.

I think Christians have a very different image of the "Christian God" than is the reality. In that article, God (in a Muslim perspective) is like a sexist, unrelenting slave drive. And then God (from the Christian perspective) is an all loving, all accepting God. And that is the basis for the article. I'm sorry but I deeply disagree with this portrayal of the God of the Bible. In fact I'd say the God of the Bible is far more sexist and slave driving.

I'm going to point out a few things from the Bible. Now, they are from the old testament. Immediately most Christians will say "hey hold on, we don't follow the Old Testament, Jesus died for our sins!" Yes that is true according to Christian ideology, but it is the same God who enforced these regulations, etc. at one time.

Let's take Deuteronomy 22
28-29
"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife."
If a man rapes an unbetrothed virgin, he must pay her father 50 shekels of silver and then marry her.

23-24
"If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city."
If a woman is raped in the city and doesn't cry out loud enough, the men of the city must stone her to death.

Of course similarly, any man and woman who sleep together who aren't married should be stoned to death as well. Actually here is a nice flow chart I found that represents Deuteronomy 22
http://i.imgur.com/BIBnD.jpg


More sexism in the Bible:
(from the New Testament, from Paul)
1 Corinthians 14:34-36
"As in all the churches of the saints, women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church"

Ephesians 5:22 "Wives, submit to your husbands as the Lord."


I'd like to bring up another point from your article
7. “In the end, I will select a choice group even from those who believed and applied my final guidance to their lives and they whom I have favoured will enjoy paradise”:

I believe the article is painting this as though Muslims have it bad. But I on the other hand think this is a huge plus in Islam. In Christianity, you can accept Jesus into your heart, and you have paradise. The bushman living in Africa, the Jew living in Israel, etc. They have 0 chance of getting into heaven. Only those who accept Jesus. Even then, that Christian can go around, do whatever he wants in life, do any number of bad things, but he has accepted JEsus so he is saved. We more or less believe in Islam (at least how I have been taught) is that we can't tell who is going to heaven. We can't pass such judgements and only God knows. Even on non-Muslims, I can't say. What I am saying is, if you take person A who is born to a Muslim family and person B who is born to a Hindu family, I don't think there's any greater chance person A will find paradise. I think it comes down more to how the person lived their life. Just because Muslim A was raised a Muslim if he did bad things in life , I don't think he'll find paradise

GOD IS A SLAVE DRIVER

(sorry all caps I"m trying to separate this post up so it's not all that long)
The Bible and the Qur'an both have instances of God destroying cities and killing people because they did this or that thing bad. Both say God is forgiving as well. in fact in the Qur'an, you pretty much can't go a single page or even half a page without coming across the phrase "For God is all forgiving and merciful." So I guess I don't see what your point is there. What difference do you think you are talking about? I am assuming again you are referring to Jesus. But you can't simply ignore everything that happened in the Old Testament and forget about it. It's like you're saying "I could never be a Muslim because their God is mean! My God was mean in the same of course but... he changed and so... I'm cool with that... past is past..." lol I just don't think it works that way!

________________________________
Anyway... I did not say any of this to discredit your religion or say "mine is better than yours!" I did it to point out that I really don't believe Christianity and Islam are all that different in terms of the negative things you bring up. The point of the article was to say "I'm not a Muslim because Muslim's believe in a sexist, slave driving God but the Christian God is nice and full of butterfly's and ponies and women are equals to men!" But I disagree. It's all the same. I imagine, like most Christians, you probably have not read your own Bible. I would suggest you do that to see just how vindictive and spiteful God of the Bible really is.

So how do you deal with being a Christian and knowing all of this? Probably the same way I deal with being a Muslim. I say... ****... there's things i don't understand about the universe, I know i don't want to go to hell, I know this came in a different time.

[NicoleAbdelfatta...]

Hey Nazia! Just to interject my 2 cents here, I was raised protestant christian and someone gave me a bible once, (one that included the old testament and the new testament) and my father took it away from me. He said that we didn't need the old testament. Sooooo.......just wanted to give you a personal example of how right you are. AND btw my dad took classes to be an ordained minister.....LOL! (if u knew my dad and his actions this would make EVERYONE laugh).

[Sol Invictus]

@Nazia1987:

Hey and thanks for replying. I'll get right into it simply because I don't want to waste any time. Speaking of time, as far as your comment about slavery in the Qur'an and that having been a different time I don't know how much weight I could put on that given that since the laws in the Qur'an are eternal and given that the Muslim God did not abrogate the law on slavery, it would still be valid today.

Now I don't know what you mean by most Christians as far as it comes to the denial of the Old Testament because that's simply untrue. Most Christians affirm the Old Testament. (On that note let us imagine at this point that what you said was true. If so, it wouldn't at all be different than what a Muslim does with the Old and New Testament in that they largely dismiss them and so for you to chastise these supposed Christians for doing the same thing seems rather hypocritical to me. If a Muslim is allowed to get away with it and still claim that they believe in the same God who revealed the Old Testament and the Gospel then why would you bring up this objection when clearly, Muslims are equally guilty of it. They simply give a different reason for doing so.) Now you seem to have misunderstood me, I never said that the Muslim God was evil for ordering the stoning of adulterers and so forth (for the Christian did the same but then again this is just the short answer and I do believe that it is wrong to stone adulterers and so forth now--and yes, that's because of what the Bible teaches) rather I specifically targeted clear teachings within Islam and to that you have not responded (except somewhat in regards to perceived sexism within the Church).

As it concerns this supposed sexism let me first say that the doctrine regards to women teaching and preaching within the Church. Specifically it concerns women having a role of leadership over men within the confines of the Church. All this is saying is that women are not allowed the same level of authority within the Church as men. As a Muslim, I'm surprised that you find this sexist given that I have never heard of a female Imam, Sheik or so forth and as such I believe that the issue is largely the same in Islam as in biblical Christianity. I don't find this to be sexist at all but rather simply a case of men and women having been given different roles yet equally as important. If we are to accept everything that you have said, then it would seem to me that you would also have to regard the Muslim God as sexist while I do not have to hold the same opinion as it concerns Yahweh.

You quote Ephesians 5:22 and fail to mention that within Christianity, the one who has the most authority must make himself the least. Jesus particularly taught this by washing the feet of his disciples--this was something that which a slave did. So if anything by granting the husband authority within the family dynamic, the Bible is calling for a mutual submitting on the part of the wife and husband. I could speak at length about this (and I will if you want me to) but once more I believe that the only religion you manage to disparage at this point is that of Islam because I'm sure that it also gives to the husband the primary authority within marriage yet unlike Christianity, does not call him to treat his woman as his equal.

Umm, as far as bushmen and the Jews go, where do you get the statistic that they have zero chance of accepting Jesus. Actually I should apologize in case that that came off as sarcastic. I didn't mean it to, it's simply the way I would ask the question in real life, and trust me, it would be without any sarcasm. History testifies that bushman did accept the gospel, history testifies that Christianity began in Israel by Jews and that Jews still come to Jesus. Bushman still come to Jesus as well so I really don't see your point on this matter. That said, according to Islam, one has to accept the prophethood of Mohammad as well so this would be equally troublesome to the Jew and bushman and so once more I do not see your objection. If anything, Islam is guilty of the same thing. That said, if Christianity is to be believed then you can take comfort in knowing that God is just and he will not find you guilty for knowledge that you could never possess. Rather, he will make sure that in one way or another those who have never been preached to will still have the chance of going to heaven--and yes, God would do so through his son, Jesus.

Christianity is quite clear that God has given the gift of salvation to all those who believe because he is a lover. That said, if the Christian is repeatedly doing bad stuff then this might be evidence to the fact that they have not been saved bu that in itself is a subject for another thread. In some respect, Islam and Christianity aren't too different on this point except that in Christianity, God has promised that you can know whether you have been saved. I can't agree with you calling God a slave driver. While that description does fit the Muslim God, nowhere in the Bible does God call himself a slave driver. You seem to have misread the post. It was never argued that because the Muslim God killed people he was therefore mean etc. but rather because of the specific doctrines outlined within the post. That said, you have not touched upon them at all and instead have basically said, "yeah I know that that's bad but you believe in the same thing". If you were in fact right, all you'd prove was that both of our perceptions of God were greatly inadequate but seeing as you have not actually proven this, this point is then moot.

I greatly love your assumption of me not having read the Bible simply for the fact that it's so completely wrong. The above was a rather brief reply on my part but if you would like, I could go into more depth and support my view with actual citations from the Bible. Once more though, I would very much like it if you could respond to the actual questions brought up in the article instead of engaging in tu quoques. (Given that you simply argued that the Christian God did the same thing as the Muslim God, you are basically calling your own God "vindictive and spiteful". I on the other hand do not see my God like that and so while I agree with you when it comes to your problems with the Muslim God, I cannot likewise support you when it comes to the God of the Bible :3)

@NicoleAbdelfattah: I'm pretty sure that I responded to your line of thought in the above.

once again, thanks for commenting.

This post has been edited by Sol Invictus: Dec 8 2010, 10:10 AM

[Nazia1987]

@Nazia1987:

Hey and thanks for replying. I'll get right into it simply because I don't want to waste any time. Speaking of time, as far as your comment about slavery in the Qur'an and that having been a different time I don't know how much weight I could put on that given that since the laws in the Qur'an are eternal and given that the Muslim God did not abrogate the law on slavery, it would still be valid today.

I agree with you. An interesting conundrum, which I just tend to overlook and say "I don't need this as part of my morality." I'm sure you do the same, as slavery is allowed in the Bible in the exact same way. (I mean this to say, there is no ayat in the Qur'an which says "slavery is legal to you" its just that there are references as to how to treat slaves, etc. Similarly, the Bible has references to how slaves should act (be obedient to your masters!) and how people should treat slaves, so both Islam and Christianity allow slavery on the same level. So again, I'm sure both you and I deal with that in the same way.

Now I don't know what you mean by most Christians as far as it comes to the denial of the Old Testament because that's simply untrue.

I think you and I are both wrong in those assumptions. I grew up around Christians, and this is the line I am fed 80% of the time. Perhaps it is different for different Christians.

Most Christians affirm the Old Testament. (On that note let us imagine at this point that what you said was true. If so, it wouldn't at all be different than what a Muslim does with the Old and New Testament in that they largely dismiss them and so for you to chastise these supposed Christians for doing the same thing seems rather hypocritical to me. If a Muslim is allowed to get away with it and still claim that they believe in the same God who revealed the Old Testament and the Gospel then why would you bring up this objection when clearly, Muslims are equally guilty of it. They simply give a different reason for doing so.) Now you seem to have misunderstood me, I never said that the Muslim God was evil for ordering the stoning of adulterers and so forth (for the Christian did the same but then again this is just the short answer and I do believe that it is wrong to stone adulterers and so forth now--and yes, that's because of what the Bible teaches) rather I specifically targeted clear teachings within Islam and to that you have not responded (except somewhat in regards to perceived sexism within the Church).

Perhaps I didn't respond to them because the article was long and boring. I am not trying to be rude, but if there are specific passages you want addressed, can you please just post them here? I have the attention span of a 2 year old. That's why I'm browsing the net during finals week lol.

As it concerns this supposed sexism let me first say that the doctrine regards to women teaching and preaching within the Church. Specifically it concerns women having a role of leadership over men within the confines of the Church. All this is saying is that women are not allowed the same level of authority within the Church as men. As a Muslim, I'm surprised that you find this sexist given that I have never heard of a female Imam, Sheik or so forth and as such I believe that the issue is largely the same in Islam as in biblical Christianity. I don't find this to be sexist at all but rather simply a case of men and women having been given different roles yet equally as important. If we are to accept everything that you have said, then it would seem to me that you would also have to regard the Muslim God as sexist while I do not have to hold the same opinion as it concerns Yahweh.

I was not bringing that up to say "oh look! Christianity is sexist and Islam is NOT!" I was bringing it up to say, I believe both the religions are sexist in terms of modern, western standards. (fellow Muslims I know this is like a terrible thing to say but it's true...) Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are all sexist in terms of what we as modern Americans think of as sexist. I brought this up to say, I deal with that part of the religion the same way you probably deal with it. But it seems more to me like you are rationalizing it away and trying to make it sound what it isn't. In that case, you are exactly like most Muslims I know as well. Similarly all Muslims will say "its not that Islam its sexist, its that men and women are made different and have different roles in life. But God does not value one (man or woman) over the other." It seems this is the same philosophy in fundamentalist Christianity as well as fundamentalist Islam. I was just saying its the same.

You quote Ephesians 5:22 and fail to mention that within Christianity, the one who has the most authority must make himself the least. Jesus particularly taught this by washing the feet of his disciples--this was something that which a slave did. So if anything by granting the husband authority within the family dynamic, the Bible is calling for a mutual submitting on the part of the wife and husband. I could speak at length about this (and I will if you want me to) but once more I believe that the only religion you manage to disparage at this point is that of Islam because I'm sure that it also gives to the husband the primary authority within marriage yet unlike Christianity, does not call him to treat his woman as his equal.

The verse is clear. Women should submit to their husbands. How can you elaborate on this? Probably the same apologetic views that most Muslims have as well. Let's call it what it is. In Islam, in Christianity, in Judaism, the values in terms of gender are out of line with modern western society. Men are the authorities in the family and the women have to submit. Muslims and Christians alike can try and twist this around to make it seem more compatible with what modern Americans like to hear but it is what it is. Let's not bull****.

Umm, as far as bushmen and the Jews go, where do you get the statistic that they have zero chance of accepting Jesus.

You missed my point. You are still pointing out that, they would have to accept Jesus. I was saying, somebody who is raised to believe a different way, who would clearly choose NOT to accept Christianity is going to go to hell. Similarly somebody in a tiny village who might only hear of Christianity once in their life who will likely not accept according to Christinaity will go to hell.

Actually I should apologize in case that that came off as sarcastic. I didn't mean it to, it's simply the way I would ask the question in real life, and trust me, it would be without any sarcasm. History testifies that bushman did accept the gospel, history testifies that Christianity began in Israel by Jews and that Jews still come to Jesus. Bushman still come to Jesus as well so I really don't see your point on this matter. That said, according to Islam, one has to accept the prophethood of Mohammad as well so this would be equally troublesome to the Jew and bushman and so once more I do not see your objection. If anything, Islam is guilty of the same thing. That said, if Christianity is to be believed then you can take comfort in knowing that God is just and he will not find you guilty for knowledge that you could never possess. Rather, he will make sure that in one way or another those who have never been preached to will still have the chance of going to heaven--and yes, God would do so through his son, Jesus.

Yes I know Christians (as well as Muslims) have long histories of going in to places where they do not belong, and breathing religion down the locals throats and essentially converting villages, societies, etc.

Christianity is quite clear that God has given the gift of salvation to all those who believe because he is a lover. That said, if the Christian is repeatedly doing bad stuff then this might be evidence to the fact that they have not been saved bu that in itself is a subject for another thread. In some respect, Islam and Christianity aren't too different on this point except that in Christianity, God has promised that you can know whether you have been saved. I can't agree with you calling God a slave driver. While that description does fit the Muslim God, nowhere in the Bible does God call himself a slave driver. You seem to have misread the post. It was never argued that because the Muslim God killed people he was therefore mean etc. but rather because of the specific doctrines outlined within the post. That said, you have not touched upon them at all and instead have basically said, "yeah I know that that's bad but you believe in the same thing". If you were in fact right, all you'd prove was that both of our perceptions of God were greatly inadequate but seeing as you have not actually proven this, this point is then moot.

Please give me the ayat of the Qur'an where God says "I am a slave driver."

What doctrines have I not touched upon? Seriously if I haven't its not on purpose. LIke I said, a 2 year old. Please just post them specifically.

I greatly love your assumption of me not having read the Bible simply for the fact that it's so completely wrong. The above was a rather brief reply on my part but if you would like, I could go into more depth and support my view with actual citations from the Bible. Once more though, I would very much like it if you could respond to the actual questions brought up in the article instead of engaging in tu quoques. (Given that you simply argued that the Christian God did the same thing as the Muslim God, you are basically calling your own God "vindictive and spiteful". I on the other hand do not see my God like that and so while I agree with you when it comes to your problems with the Muslim God, I cannot likewise support you when it comes to the God of the Bible :3)

Sorry for my assumptions. Again I did not point this out to say "Islam is better than Christianity!" I pointed it to pretty much say, hey both are pretty much the same... I guess its because, you know if an athiest comes to me and says "how can you believe this! There is destruction and sexism , etc" I really have to shrug and say "**** they have a point... in terms of the way they were raised in modern, western society... I can see why it would be horribly confusing and offensive to them..." but when a Christian says it its just like... come on man... your book has all the same stuff.... you guys just aren't fundamentalists about it...

[ayesha.ansari]

to show your faith and religion the saying is not enough, you have to prove it by your act.

[Nazia1987]

to show your faith and religion the saying is not enough, you have to prove it by your act.

I'm so confused. Is this directed at me or him? And what does it have to do with the discussion? I'm lost here?

[Sol Invictus]

Sorry for the late reply, I was busy with exams.

I agree with you. An interesting conundrum, which I just tend to overlook and say "I don't need this as part of my morality." I'm sure you do the same, as slavery is allowed in the Bible in the exact same way. (I mean this to say, there is no ayat in the Qur'an which says "slavery is legal to you" its just that there are references as to how to treat slaves, etc. Similarly, the Bible has references to how slaves should act (be obedient to your masters!) and how people should treat slaves, so both Islam and Christianity allow slavery on the same level. So again, I'm sure both you and I deal with that in the same way.

Well actually the issue of slavery in the bible is quite different and depending of whether you're referring to references to slavery in the new or old testament would require two different answers because of what each covenant entailed to do. That said, if I were to explain it to you you'd at least see that it's fairly different from Islam because at the very least, Islam also purports to be a political system which therefore changes the matter. So therefore, I do not think that we deal with it in the same way because I don't simply ignore it but rather from working within the framework of each covenant, I am able to approach the matter in a reasonable way that does not require me to condone slavery or to ignore instances of it within my holy book.

I think you and I are both wrong in those assumptions. I grew up around Christians, and this is the line I am fed 80% of the time. Perhaps it is different for different Christians.

Well I would think that you'd have to look at the tenets of Christianity in order to make such a statement and not specifically how Christians act. You might balk at the idea but I believe that you'd say the same thing if I made the statement that from my experience (and given that it seems that a terrorist is arrested every single week) most Muslims are terrorists or ideologically support them.

Perhaps I didn't respond to them because the article was long and boring. I am not trying to be rude, but if there are specific passages you want addressed, can you please just post them here? I have the attention span of a 2 year old. That's why I'm browsing the net during finals week lol.

I have two points in particular I'd like to see addressed (sorry if they're a bit long):

1. What the reader will note is how absolute the above statements are. Unlike the God of Islam, Yahweh does not say, “come to me and maybe I’ll save you”—no, he is explicit in declaring his salvation for all those who believe in him. Furthermore, it’s interesting, that hundreds of years before the message of Islam was first preached, Islam itself was reprimanded in the above prophetic passages. The bible expressly states that Christians have not received a spirit of slavery so as to live in fear. The Muslim’s spirit is one of slavery. They live in fear of their salvation everyday for none can say with all honesty and confidence that they are saved from hell. There is always a level of uncertainty, a level of doubt at the back of the minds of every Muslim. Behind every word of praise, behind every recitation of the Qur’an, all Muslims wonder whether they are loved by God and whether they will gain heaven. In calling the Christian towards Islam, the Muslim would like to call us to a religion of uncertainty, a religion of doubt, they would once more make us subject to the spirit of fear. In calling us and in fact all other peoples to the religion of Islam, the Muslim would for us to once more be chained, bonded, and shackled to the evils of slavery and fright. Yet Christ expressly declares that he came to set us free from slavery (John 8:32-36). Therefore the Christian on the other hand need not fear anything anymore because nothing can separate them from the love of God (Romans 8:35-39). Quite sadly, the love of God is another thing that no Muslim can claim to. As Islam declares, the ones whom Allah loves will be in heaven, yet no individual Muslim can say for sure that they will be in heaven hence, no Muslim can say for sure that they are loved of Allah.

2. Herein I am only saying what Muslims say of Allah themselves. According to Islam, Allah sent the Torah, and the Gospel as a guidance to mankind (Surah 5:46).

“Allah revealed the Torah and Injeel [Gospel] before this (Quran) as a guide to mankind.” — Surah 3:3-4

Now Muslims, upon realizing that the Gospel and the Torah completely contradict the Qur’an, have claimed that these texts have been corrupted in order to save face. What is interesting about this reasoning is that it contradicts the claims of the Qur’an itself (Surah 10:64). Anyway, assuming that the Qur’an is wrong on this account and the Muslim is right, then Islam presents us with a God who utterly failed twice to get his message out and then has the gull to claim to be all-powerful. Through his inability to protect his word, millions upon millions of individuals were raised to believe in a message he had failed to keep pure and yet Allah would still wish to punish Christians and Jews for his own weakness. In the Muslim point of view, Allah’s inability to keep his word from corruption lead to the creation of the greatest false religion of all time which even Islam itself has been unable to supersede in over 1, 400 years. As is evident, Islam presents us with a deity who blames mankind for his own mistakes and impotence yet would still demand worship.

Against this spectacularly deficient understanding of the dispensation of God, the Bible tells us that God’s word is unalterable. It will not be corrupted and it will abide forever (Isaiah 40:8). Furthermore, God promises us in the Bible that he will accomplish what he has set out to do (Isaiah 55:11).

This of course bars all failure and we are therefore able to trust in him and his word in a manner completely unlike that of the God of Islam. God’s word is the primary and the fullest means in which he has revealed himself and so for God’s word to have at one time failed—nevermind fail twice—is for God to have failed and proven himself to be untrustworthy. This is an important distinction between Christianity and Islam. Yahweh’s word has never failed while the recurring failures of Allah have given us every reason to distrust him. Once more I’m only saying what Muslims say of their religion in that it is they that claim that Allah’s word was textually corrupted and thus failed twice.

The verse is clear. Women should submit to their husbands. How can you elaborate on this? Probably the same apologetic views that most Muslims have as well. Let's call it what it is. In Islam, in Christianity, in Judaism, the values in terms of gender are out of line with modern western society. Men are the authorities in the family and the women have to submit. Muslims and Christians alike can try and twist this around to make it seem more compatible with what modern Americans like to hear but it is what it is. Let's not bull****.

I really don't think that I've written anything to the effect of bull****. Anyway, one can't make a doctrine out of a single verse, rather they have to take everything into context so here is what I had written on the subject (sorry once more for the long quote):

Interestingly enough, this last thought leads us to one of Ms. Mustafah’s points concerning the fact that according to the Holy Bible, obeying one’s husband is tantamount to obeying God. In some respect she is indeed correct seeing as obeying any authority (as long as they do not go against the word of God) translates to obeying God (Hebrews 13:17, 1 Peter 2:13-17) yet this does not at all mean that the wife should revere her husband as she would do God (on this note, I must make note of the hypocrisy in her making of this claim seeing as in Islam it is taught that a woman’s very salvation hinges on how well her husband is satisfied with her and that he possesses absolute authority over her—if this is not the elevation of the husband to the status of God then I don’t know what is). As Christianity is concerned, it is indeed true that while men and women are ontologically equal, they are given different roles to play. One such role which God has deemed fit to give to the husband is that of the chief decision-maker (in some areas of life) and yet by making the man’s very example Christ himself, he has expressly insured that if God’s decree were to be followed in full, there could be no abuse nor injustice felt on the part of the woman.

When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. “Do you understand what I have done for you?” he asked them. “You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am. Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them. – John 13:12-17 NIV

When the ten heard about this, they were indignant with the two brothers. Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” – Matthew 20:24-28 NIV

The above is the example of Christ that every Christian is called to follow. It goes without saying that this would indeed be even more enforced in the relationship between a husband and wife. The message and life of the Lord Jesus Christ has consistently been about overturning the values that the world holds dear. He emphasized that the more authority one has, the more he should think not of himself but rather to esteem others as better than himself. He called those with power to become servants. As the servant thinks nothing of himself, Jesus explained that this should be the relationship that a Christian should have for the other, and that the husband and wife should mutually possess for one another.

The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife’s body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband’s body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command. I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that. – 1 Corinthians 7:3-7 NIV

In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— for we are members of his body. “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. – Ephesians 5:28-33 NIV

The bible stresses that the husband should love his wife as he loves his own self and no less. In the manner in which he feeds himself, clothes himself, respects his needs and goes about to have them fulfilled—so should he do likewise for his wife. Contrary from what Islam mandates, the husband has no right to demand intercourse from his wife and refuse to take care of her nor beat her if she should object to his command. No, Christianity maintains that a husband marries a person (who deserves respect, love, care) and not simply a means of satisfying one’s sexual urges. Christianity maintains that intercourse (or the lack thereof) should be reached through mutual consent wherein each party is to think about the wants of the other before their own. That is equality, that is love, that is Christianity. Only the most biased individual could observe this stern contrast between Christianity and Islam and deem the latter to hold more respect for women.

You missed my point. You are still pointing out that, they would have to accept Jesus. I was saying, somebody who is raised to believe a different way, who would clearly choose NOT to accept Christianity is going to go to hell. Similarly somebody in a tiny village who might only hear of Christianity once in their life who will likely not accept according to Christinaity will go to hell.

The difference between Christians and Muslims on this issue is that Christians believe that one has to believe God to be their Lord and Saviour in order to not go to hell while Muslims believe that one has to add Mohammed into the equation. The above is far more detrimental to Islam than it is towards Christianity. That said, you've misrepresented what Christianity teaches on the subject but given that this isn't a primary point of contention, I'll let it pass.

Please give me the ayat of the Qur'an where God says "I am a slave driver."

Umm, you're the one who accused your God of being a slave-driver. I never said that and so I simply agreed with you on that subject. How is it then that you're making it to seem as if I'm the one who was saying so?

This post has been edited by Sol Invictus: Dec 14 2010, 01:47 PM

[Killed Bill]

The difference between Christians and Muslims on this issue is that Christians believe that one has to believe God to be their Lord and Saviour in order to not go to hell while Muslims believe that one has to add Mohammed into the equation. The above is far more detrimental to Islam than it is towards Christianity.

Where do you get this from? One has to add Muhammad in the picture if one claims to be a Muslim

The Quran makes it clear that it is not only Muslims who will enter paradise, but some Christians and some Jews and some "believers".

With regards to Christianity, if you are not Christian, you go to hell.

[Sol Invictus]

Where do you get this from? One has to add Muhammad in the picture if one claims to be a Muslim

The Quran makes it clear that it is not only Muslims who will enter paradise, but some Christians and some Jews and some "believers".

With regards to Christianity, if you are not Christian, you go to hell.

Quite clearly you don't even know what Islam itself teaches. Let me help you. Where the Qur'an says that some Christians will be in heaven it doesn't mean any Christian who came after Mohammad and the message of Islam and that goes the same for when it speaks of Jews. Christianity in fact teaches the same thing as it comes to Jews (and members of any other religion though I should add that this is greatly simplifying the matter and that there is much else that needs to be said when it comes to this point) and so you can't get off making demonstrably false claims as you've done above (as if Islam by your interpretation wasn't guilty of the same). Please just think about what the Shahada says and ask yourself what the inclusion of Mohammad means within that statement of faith? So once more, according to Islam, you need God plus another human in order to be saved while if Christianity is true, you simply need to believe in God to be saved (for Christians believe Jesus to be God). That said, thanks for commenting.

[Killed Bill]

Where do you get this from? One has to add Muhammad in the picture if one claims to be a Muslim

The Quran makes it clear that it is not only Muslims who will enter paradise, but some Christians and some Jews and some "believers".

With regards to Christianity, if you are not Christian, you go to hell.

Quite clearly you don't even know what Islam itself teaches. Let me help you. Where the Qur'an says that some Christians will be in heaven it doesn't mean any Christian who came after Mohammad and the message of Islam and that goes the same for when it speaks of Jews. Christianity in fact teaches the same thing as it comes to Jews (and members of any other religion though I should add that this is greatly simplifying the matter and that there is much else that needs to be said when it comes to this point) and so you can't get off making demonstrably false claims as you've done above (as if Islam by your interpretation wasn't guilty of the same). Please just think about what the Shahada says and ask yourself what the inclusion of Mohammad means within that statement of faith? So once more, according to Islam, you need God plus another human in order to be saved while if Christianity is true, you simply need to believe in God to be saved (for Christians believe Jesus to be God). That said, thanks for commenting.

Can I be a Christian and accept not divinity in Jesus? He was simply a man, flesh and blood, made to live again through the miracles of God.

{62} Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabaeans, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.

The verse first mentions the believers, and then says, "whoever believes in Allah..." The context shows that the latter phrase refers to the real belief, the true iman, and that the word, "those who believe", (mentioned at first) refers to those who call themselves believers. The verse says that Allah gives no importance to names, like the believers, the Jews, the Christians or the Sabaeans. One cannot get a reward from Allah, nor can he be saved from punishment, merely by giving oneself good titles, as they, for example, claim that: no one will enter the Garden except he who was a Jew or a Christian (2:111). The only criterion, the only standard, of honour and happiness is the real belief in Allah and the Day of Resurrection, accompanied by good deeds. It should be noted that Allah did not say, 'whoever of them believes'; otherwise it would have accorded some recognition to these titles, and would have implied that there was, after all, some benefit in acquiring these names.

Appears we were both wrong

[Sol Invictus]

Can I be a Christian and accept not divinity in Jesus? He was simply a man, flesh and blood, made to live again through the miracles of God.

Can I go to heaven and not accept the prophethood of mohammad? He was simply a man who incorrectly thought he was receiving revelations from God. Once more, if Christianity is correct than one simply needs to believe in God (because to christians Jesus is God) while if Islam is correct one needs to add Mohammad into the equation.

That said, we are getting somewhat off-topic and I would ask that you could respond to my original question etc. Thanks again for commenting.

This post has been edited by Sol Invictus: Dec 16 2010, 03:37 PM

[Nazia1987]

Can I go to heaven and not accept the prophethood of mohammad? He was simply a man who incorrectly thought he was receiving revelations from God. Once more, if Christianity is correct than one simply needs to believe in God (because to christians Jesus is God) while if Islam is correct one needs to add Mohammad into the equation.

That said, we are getting somewhat off-topic and I would ask that you could respond to my original question etc. Thanks again for commenting.

I'm geting the impression from this response that you are not going to really accept any answers we give you on this site. Killed Bill and I both explained this exact concept to you, and it's just gone around in circles. I answered some questions for you and similarly it just went back in circles.

I'm off this thread. Hopefully somebody else will take it on.

We get it, you think Christianity is the way and Islam is an evil wacko religion. You're entitled to that opinion. What are you really looking for on this site? (I'm not trying to drive the OP away and OP please don't think that MO is open to everyone... I'm just curious...)

This post has been edited by Nazia1987: Dec 16 2010, 09:01 PM

[Sol Invictus]

I'm geting the impression from this response that you are not going to really accept any answers we give you on this site. Killed Bill and I both explained this exact concept to you, and it's just gone around in circles. I answered some questions for you and similarly it just went back in circles.

I'm off this thread. Hopefully somebody else will take it on.

We get it, you think Christianity is the way and Islam is an evil wacko religion. You're entitled to that opinion. What are you really looking for on this site? (I'm not trying to drive the OP away and OP please don't think that MO is open to everyone... I'm just curious...)

I'm getting the impression that you misunderstood my reply. I had explained the Christian concept to Killed Bill (seeing as both you and him were so ready to believe that Christianity was even more exclusive than Islam) and yet he seemingly didn't believe me. Therefore I replied in kind, not that I actually believe in the prophethood of Muhammad mind you. That said, this thread was never to deal with your prophet anyway and so I respectfully asked him to deal with the subject at hand.

As far as my responses to you go, you'll have to admit that they were rather respectful towards you and all I did was to answer your questions while waiting for you to do the same with mine. You claimed there to be an inherent inequality between the man and the woman and I showed you why you can't make a doctrine out of a single verse and in so doing actually showed you what Christianity teaches concerning the man and the woman. You asked me to be specific about what it is that I wanted answered and so I gave you two specific points. You have yet to comment on either of these. Anyway you've said that you've left the discussion (which is perfectly alright, it's your decision) but if you were to read the the OP you'd see that I simply wanted the muslim response to the points in the article (something which I have yet to receive) and more specifically, whether the article misrepresents the tenets of Islam. Once more, thanks for posting.

[Nazia1987]

As far as my responses to you go, you'll have to admit that they were rather respectful towards you and all I did was to answer your questions while waiting for you to do the same with mine. You claimed there to be an inherent inequality between the man and the woman and I showed you why you can't make a doctrine out of a single verse and in so doing actually showed you what Christianity teaches concerning the man and the woman. You asked me to be specific about what it is that I wanted answered and so I gave you two specific points. You have yet to comment on either of these. Anyway you've said that you've left the discussion (which is perfectly alright, it's your decision) but if you were to read the the OP you'd see that I simply wanted the muslim response to the points in the article (something which I have yet to receive) and more specifically, whether the article misrepresents the tenets of Islam. Once more, thanks for posting.

Thanks for your response. Please don't think I meant to imply that you were in some way being rude. By all means you have been respectful and just generally asking questions, so I wasn't trying to imply that.

let me try to explain better. let me address this:

You claimed there to be an inherent inequality between the man and the woman and I showed you why you can't make a doctrine out of a single verse and in so doing actually showed you what Christianity teaches concerning the man and the woman.

You will see every Muslim give you this same response about Islam. You can't take a single verse from the Qur'an and take it out of context. See for example, your rebuttle to the inherent sexism I pointed out was:

The bible stresses that the husband should love his wife as he loves his own self and no less. In the manner in which he feeds himself, clothes himself, respects his needs and goes about to have them fulfilled—so should he do likewise for his wife. Contrary from what Islam mandates, the husband has no right to demand intercourse from his wife and refuse to take care of her nor beat her if she should object to his command. No, Christianity maintains that a husband marries a person (who deserves respect, love, care) and not simply a means of satisfying one’s sexual urges. Christianity maintains that intercourse (or the lack thereof) should be reached through mutual consent wherein each party is to think about the wants of the other before their own. That is equality, that is love, that is Christianity. Only the most biased individual could observe this stern contrast between Christianity and Islam and deem the latter to hold more respect for women.

First off, I feel like you didn't address that exact verse I gave you. Or perhaps you did and it just got burried in the thread. But everything you've written in this rebuttle I can say this is not Islam. Islam does not say to marry a woman for sexual intercourse. Islam says that man and women are garments for each other and made for each other. Islam tells us that the best men are those who respect their wives and treat them kindly. You say about men beating their women but there are plenty of scholars who entirely disagree with this point and will tell you it has to do with translation, etc. What is clear in islam however is that men do not marry women to satisfy their sexual urges. I'm not even sure where this notion comes from. But the reason why I said I don't feel much like discussing is because I have a feeling you will disregard everything I've written here and still harbor your own opinion. (If I'm wrong there then I apologize)

Again, how do you deal with the fact that the Bible tells women to keep silent in church and obey their husbands?

You asked me to be specific about what it is that I wanted answered and so I gave you two specific points. You have yet to comment on either of these

I'm sorry the thread has gotten too long. I don't know where these are.

In a roundabout way what I'm trying to say is, anybody (Muslim, Christian, athiest, etc) can do a detailed analysis on the Biblie and point out the same sexism, the same violence, the same oppression, etc. And you guys all have the same cookie cutter responses that we do. "you have to take it in context" "well Jesus lived like this" "well, translation" "well, the time". I can make the same responses to you about Islam. Do you see what I'm saying?

[teacher]

In ther old testement we lived under what is called "the law" in the new testement we live under "the grace" see, when God lost his Son he had a change of heart, he saw the frailties of being human and so cut us some slack.

[Nazia1987]

In ther old testement we lived under what is called "the law" in the new testement we live under "the grace" see, when God lost his Son he had a change of heart, he saw the frailties of being human and so cut us some slack.

Ya but it doesn't change the fact that the God you worship still did all the crazy terrible things that he did. Because you believe God makes no mistakes, you can't think that any of the awful things in the Old Testament (for example, if a woman is raped her rapist can marry her and be excused punishment but otherwise she should be stoned to death) are wrong. Which means you condone such things in the same way.

I am not saying your average Christian is walking around thinking terrible things like this. That's the point I'm making. I deal with it the same day you would deal with the reality of Christianity if you really looked into it

[teacher]

Ya but it doesn't change the fact that the God you worship still did all the crazy terrible things that he did.

Have I claimed it did?

Because you believe God makes no mistakes

Where do I claim that?

you can't think that any of the awful things in the Old Testament (for example, if a woman is raped her rapist can marry her and be excused punishment but otherwise she should be stoned to death) are wrong.

Where are you getting all this? Oh, I see, you have to make crap up that you think I think and then you rail against said crap. Weak Nazia, very weak.

Which means you condone such things in the same way.

Yea, you just don't have a friggin clue as to what is going on here.

I am not saying your average Christian is walking around thinking terrible things like this. That's the point I'm making. I deal with it the same day you would deal with the reality of Christianity if you really looked into it

I really don't know what that means.

Listen Nazia, there's all kinds of contradicitons and crap in my Bible, but then it was wrote by man, inspired by God perhaps, but wrote by man.

You don't see a whole lot of Christians walking around these days claiming that they have justification to owning slaves or killing folks cause it says so in the old testement.

You do have a whole lot of Muslims doing exactly that though.

See, Nazia, my faith and it's followers grew up.

It's time the followers of Islam do the same.

If you don't then you just gonna end up dead, and all you really have to do is leave me alone.

But then Allah commands otherwise, don't he?

[Nazia1987]

Have I claimed it did?

My apologies in advance if I assumed something that was not true. From your post I had gotten the impression that you were a Christian who believes in the bible. I think I made some assumptions based on that, so maybe you could tell me what it is that you believe so that I will have some clarification because I am a little confused. Do you believe in the Bible? Do you believe in the Old Testament as well as the New Testament? Do you believe all the accounts of god smiting this or that person, etc. I am not mocking your religion, I'm just generally curious, as maybe this is something I've misunderstood about Christians. I mean, in my mind, if you believe in all of those things and that God has done all of those things, then you are worshiping a god who has done some evil **** in terms of modern standards. In which case, I was simply making the case that, I deal with this as a Muslim the same way you deal with this as a CHristian (because that was the original point the OP was making - this is why I won't be a Muslim because Allah has done such and such... how can you deal with that, etc). If that's NOT the case, I'm just curious what exactly DO you believe? If you don't believe in the Bible, why believe CHristianity at all? I mean why not simply be agnostic? Do you believe part of what's in the bible? Which part? How do you know what is right? I'm honestly not trying to bash your beliefs or religion, I'm just generally curious.

Listen Nazia, there's all kinds of contradicitons and crap in my Bible, but then it was wrote by man, inspired by God perhaps, but wrote by man.

If you believe this, then why do you follow Christianity? I am just honestly curious about you personally, why aren't you just agnostic? What parts do you believe are true in the bible and how do you find those parts? (This isn't an argument to say oh I think my religion is better I'm just honestly curious here)

See, Nazia, my faith and it's followers grew up.

It's time the followers of Islam do the same.

If you don't then you just gonna end up dead, and all you really have to do is leave me alone.

But then Allah commands otherwise, don't he?

Hey dude again, sorry if I made some assumptions. I hope you'll respond to the questions I posted above just so I can get a better idea of what is the difference in our beliefs here. As for the quote I'm quoting now, I agree that CHristianity and its followers "grew up". But that's something that confuses me about Christianity. What exactly has grown up. Is it that Christians recognize the bible was written in a different place/time? And so they don't believe its valid any longer? I'm not bashing it I'm just saying, why believe in the bible then? Why not just believe that there is some god, and not have to turn to Christian culture, etc. Or its that the faith as a whole just believes the basics of the religion, such as Jesus being the son of god, etc. and kind of discards the bible? This makes sense to me, I guess I'm just confused on this front as most Christians I know quote the bible when it suits them, like trying to point out how wrong homosexuality is in their minds, etc so I've just gotten confused over I dunno... the whole Christian religion in general.

There are all serious questions, and I'm not trying to deflect, I'll go back and answer any other of the questions that were directed at me from you or the OP, but I want to have these things clarified first so I'm not making assumptions about your beliefs

[teacher]

I hope you'll respond to the questions I posted above just so I can get a better idea of what is the difference in our beliefs here.

Now we gettin somewhere.

Mind if we take this discussion to my thread...?

http://muslimonline.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=5379

I've been asking all these things and I will enjoy answering your questions, but I need the views in that thread. Also, I'm a rather busy fellow in the net and that is why I try to keep in one thread, when I start bounding around I lose track of things and next thing you know I'm on some circus site and we all know that just leads down a path of despair.

This post has been edited by juan: Jan 3 2011, 10:33 PM

Reason for edit: play nice with the lingo now teach