Islam & Christianity the same tradition ?

His daddy died before he was born. He did travel as a merchant. His granddaddy was a big shot in mecca. Its certainly possible he was literate since he engaged in trade and business. He handled all his wife's business in Mecca, so if he wasn't literate at least he must have had "people".

He had to get outta Mecca because he had gone all monotheistic on the pagans - very bad for business, so after his powerful uncle and equally powerful wife died, the powers that be decided to off him, but they failed. Needless to say Mo was pissed. Hence the major shift in attitude from the meccan verses and the medinan verses and the motivation for his eventual triumphal return.

 

There have been Muslims and Christians who have used physical force.

We saw that with Christianity through the Holy Roman Empire and the several inquisitions that involved mass slaughter as well as the lives taken for what was considered heresy at a lower more individual body count through western history. We even saw that in America.

Yes. Muhammad was involved in a holy war which was not (certainly not entirely) perpetrated by him. He was not accepted in his homeland when he returned.

I wonder what you would call the Crusades. Teaching and preaching?

 

Yes, I readily admit that you're invested in lies.

More accurately, many who did so claimed His mantle, fraudulently or otherwise.

 

But only Muslims do it because of the word and deed of their founder. There's a reason he made the cover of Military History Quarterly. Jesus harmed nobody, nor did He tell anyone else to.

 

So, you're proposing that all those Christians who have EVER used force in a religious contest must be rejected as heretics and apostates?

 

Christianity believes in a trinity, where the three parts are not identical. In specific, God the father is seen as having existed forever and that he is the same god as Jesus was part of. And, God as documented in the OT blessed those who slaughtered human beings for profit!

How Jesus lived with that is not understandable by me.

BUT, we KNOW the Bible indicates that he DID.

Your idea is that Islam is worse than Christianity on the grounds that Muhammad had a war with those who attacked him over religious principles. BUT, God blessed Joshua and his people for having slaughtered those at Jericho because he wanted their land!!

Sorry. That along with the Christian religion since then is FULL of horrific violence that can not be justified by suggesting that some other people were worse.

Religion isn't a contest to see who can be marginally less horrific.

==> I'm not attacking Christianity here. I'm OK with Christians today. I'm just pointing out that you can't say your religion is better on the grounds of your guess as to the nature of PART of your god - the same god as the god of the religion you disparage.

 

That didn't stop the bloodiest religion humankind has ever seen from pretending otherwise - the 1000 years of horror under the Catholic Church.

 

Sadly you admit that despite your inability to differentiate between a statement and a lie.

More accurately, many who did claim His mantle, fraudulently or otherwise CREATED the rituals and dogma of their worship. Man creating god in his image and defining his power, his words, his motivations and interpreting his actions (or at least all those attributed directly to their god).

For being unknowable, theists sure do have a deep knowledge of their god and are fully equipped to interpret the actions attributed to him. Bit of a logical and practical conundrum, no?

 

Sola Fide "Salvation by Faith Alone" is a horrible doctrine IMO - a horrible doctrine by a horrible person to be honest. Luther was no pillar of virtue. The idea that you can do evil all your life and at the end of days whisper "I believe in Jesus ... Save me" - like Emperor Constantine did on his death bed is absurd.

This is certainly not what Jesus had in mind nor did the disciples. In Matt 7 Jesus states that not all those who call "Lord Lord" will make it through the pearly gates - followed by stating directly that works are a requirement - lack of doing bad stuff at minimum - a basic attempt to follow the teachings of Jesus which is all about works - with the Golden Rule as the Rock on which his teachings rest.

Brother James echos the words of Jesus in James 2 - he talks about works as being required and then rails against those who were promoting a "faith alone" doctrine likening these people to fools.

I don't put much "faith" in the writings of Paul but - even he was not a fan of this doctrine - albeit the doctrine is based on his teachings with respect to grace. Teachings which contradict Jesus and the disciples.

Even now - despite most of Christianity not having a clue about the teachings of Jesus - or at least not stressing them - the majority of Christianity does not accept Sola Fide. Not Catholic, not Orthodox - and even some Protestant denominations - Methodists for example reject Sola Fide.

 

Yet it is the only one that can actually work. And even then a horrific price must be paid and God paid that price rather than blow the whole thing up and start over. To reject sole fide is to state that human beings are capable of perfection which simply is not possible we don't even possess the basic attributes necessary for perfection.

 

With army to do his persuading for him...

 

What God are you talking about ? Certainly not the God of Abraham or the God of the Israelite's. Jesus also rejected this claim so it was not his God either.

What do you mean something you don't understand nor have the prerequisites ? Jesus's formula was rather simple - Don't do to others what you don't want done to you - Treat others as you would be treated. As per the famous Rabbi Hillel - the person Jesus was echoing - the rest is just commentary (meaning the rest of the Torah).

Most people have the basic prerequisites to follow this rule.

 

Since the fairy tale isn't real, it doesn't matter what people believe is required to get into the golden cube. People might as well believe in a pile of dirt for all the good it will do them. Some people do believe in a black rock.

 

Sorry not what he said do unto others as you would have them do untoo you the negative version and positive versions both have problems however because we are not omniscient omnipresent or omnisicient it may well be some things that we would like others to do unto us may well be things that others would find objectionable. For instance while it would please me greatly to have someone serve me a nice tender T-bone steak with all the trimmings and vegan would be terribly up set if you served him or her a steak even if you had no idea they were a vegan.

Christ did not reject Sole fide in fact two of his best know parables and the story of rich young ruler revolve around the idea,

 

You are not taking this topic seriously. You have a belief and you are trying to fit reality into that belief rather rather than objective assessment. Ignoring information that conflicts with your belief - avoiding those "bad thoughts" - while focusing only on thoughts that support your belief.

The above is a false dichotomy. It is not black vs white. Perfection is not required and Jesus says this quite clearly. You must however try. Perfection is not the bar that Jesus sets - in is not one or the other.

For you to completely ignore two of the three main Denominations in Christianity - stating "this is the only one that can work" - with no consideration for arguments to the contrary - even though these folks think otherwise and have for near 2000 years - is akin to sticking one's head in the sandbox.

As stated previously Jesus contradicts this doctrine strenuously as does his Brother James - leader of the Jerusalem Church after the death of Jesus.

It is not like Luther was not aware that James contradicts him directly - Luther was so put out by this contradiction that he stated that James should be removed from the Bible. Luther was doing exactly what you are doing - trying to fit reality into his perspective rather than allowing reality to shape that perspective - and trying to pretend that arguments to the contrary did not exist.

 

Yes but - telling believers that is not going to change their beliefs.

 

Yeah, an army of followers who actually believed him and his message of Allah. go figger.

 

Indeed Christ did - and finding a place where he appears not to contradict sola fide will not change this. However - if you are going to talk about some verse - then cite the verse. I happen to know the verse you are referring to Matt 19 - and while even if this verse did contradict the other passages that deny sola fide - it would not change this denial - this passage does not help you either.

Jesus is asked by a rich man how to get through the pearly gates. Jesus responds - Obey the commands = Works. What part of the first part of this equation is not clear to you ? The rich man presses Jesus further - seemingly not satisfied with the answer - wanting more confirmation. "I have done all this" he exclaims. Jesus then sarcastically states - "Well if you want to be Perfect" - sell all your stuff and give it to the poor and follow me.

Jesus does not state that perfection is required to get into heaven in this passage. He does however state what is required to be perfect.

Context matters. Again you are trying to take one verse - a verse that is highly interpretive - and on the basis of this one verse - despite all the other verses to the contrary - you want to build your entire case.

I am going to let Jesus respond. Matt 7 - the end of the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus has preached works, works, and more works.

15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

It is by one's fruit/ works that you can tell the good from the bad .

True and False Disciples

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

In case one did not understand it the first time - Jesus repeats but using even more strong language. Call Lord Lord all you like - scream "I have faith- I have faith" on the rooftops if you want. This will not necessarily get you through the pearly gates. "Only the one who does the will of my Father" and that will is what Jesus sermon has been about - works - with this being the only mention of faith in Jesus.

24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”

For those that did not get it the first or second time - Jesus repeats himself again - It is the doing of the word - Works- that builds a strong foundation - not bleating sweet nothings into the ear of Jesus.

Focusing on one passage - one that is at best mere speculation with respect to supporting sola fide - an interpretation which requires quite a stretch but - OK - while ignoring all other passages where sola fide is directly refuted (such as the first part of the rich man passage does - the passage you claim negates sola fide) is not building on a strong foundation.

The sheep and goats parable is another Matt 25:31-46. Jesus is depicted as sitting on the throne Judging who gets in and who does not. The ones who do good deeds - help the poor and so on - get in. The ones who do not do not get in.

Matt 5 - the very first words of the Sermon on the mount - "Blessed are the poor in spirit - for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven".

What does "poor in spirit" mean if not lacking in faith ?

Keep in mind that the main theme of this sermon is how to get through the pearly gates. Not some single passage.

Matt 5:13
13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.

14 “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.

Just as you are building your foundation on top of something other than "practicing the teachings of Jesus" - Sola Fide strips out the saltiness from the salt.

Just a bit further down the page -

19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Obviously Jesus does not require perfection - How could it be any more clear. If this was the case there would greater or lesser. The concept of severity of sin can be found above.

Further - he gives the bar by which you will not make it - and that bar has nothing to do with faith. You need to be more righteous than the Pharisees and the teachers of the law. Fortunately - Jesus sets the bar pretty low - he did not have much regard for the Pharisees and teachers of the law.

You are claiming there is no bar - you are welcome to this claim but this contradicts the teachings of Jesus.

Finally - the other problem with your interpretation of the rich man passage is that if your interpretation is correct - this turns Jesus into a flip flopping - irrational teacher.

 

The sadness is all yours, trust me.

Which obviously makes them utterly extraneous to Christianity as exemplified by Christ; so thanks for buttressing my point.

is utterly inimical to Christianity, obviously.

 

That or they were in it for the money. There is a whole chapter in the Koran about how to divide up the spoils of war. Pretty interesting for something billing itself as the religion of peace.

 

Horrible interpretations of the scripture involved as well as a gross misunderstanding of Christ's ministry here. In particular you butcher Mathew 17 which I had forgotten about which is all about grace alone. And like it the story if the Sheep and goats in Matthew 25. Parables I mentioned earlier are that of the Prodigal son and seed and the sower. All of those are grace and grace alone.
Actually what he gives the rich young ruler is the second table of the ten commandments, those dealing with his relationships with other humans. His response to it and Christ's response to his statement as depicted in Mark are quite instructive. The key to understanding this story only occurs after the RYR has left. When the disciples ask who then can be saved and Christ answers with man this is impossible but through God all things are possible.

 

I don't know who Rambam is, but he confirms my understanding. Islam and Judaism are both true Abrahamic beliefs. Christianity is fake. I say this as an atheist.

 

I don't think Matt 7 is about works of the faithful. The false prophets are obviously preachers offering hopes of salvation in return for worship of their wooden idols. The tree that does not bear good fruit is any one of the pagan gods who, like Jesus, die and come back to life, defeating death and showing the way to eternal life. Some of those gods, like Osiris, were represented by a piece of wood. Osiris' death was mourned, then after three days the piece of wood was washed, clothed, and paraded as the resurrected god. Seems to me that the passage from Matt is a warning that those rival gods can't offer salvation (the good fruit).

Wood has been an object of worship for all known human history (see Frazer, "The Golden Bough"). The wooden cross of Christians is merely a vestige, an ancient belief forcing its way into a religion that explicitly rejected wooden idols. A bit ironic, isn't it?

 

Rambam - rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, also known as Maimonides - was a Sephardi Jewish physician, a philosopher, and an astronomer who lived in the twelfth century.

How are you able to draw such a conclusion from writings you never read by a rabbi you never heard about before, is a mystery to me. Maimonides also said that the difference between all gentile religions and Judaism is like the difference between a statue and a living person (Yemen Epistle). He also said that, while forbidden to worship in churches but free to worship in mosques, Jews can't talk about the Torah with Muslims but are allowed to explain Torah to Christians. He certainly didn't see Islam as a true Abrahamic belief.

Furthermore, Rambam - though one of the most revered Jewish scholars of all times - is but one man. His opinion is nothing but an opinion, not an established religious belief.

 

How did I Butcher Matt 17 ? I agree that salvation is made possible through God - as in without God there would be no salvation. This does not mean that "faith alone" in Jesus is the key to the kingdom. You found one passage that is very vague - and does not necessarily mean what you are interpreting it to mean. There could be many meanings - and Jesus does not clarify.

What about context ? - as in the rest of the ministry of Jesus ? The one where he preaches works as the salvation formulation - not in veiled or mysterious language where the interpretation is left open - like the one you quoted. You completely ignore the teachings of Jesus where he is very clear - and there is no need for interpretation because he states it directly.

As stated previously - you are completely ignoring anything that contradicts your perspective - as in the vast majority of the teachings of Jesus.

Then you spout some unsubstantiated gibberish about the Sheep and Goats parable - a parable which clearly shows that works were the way that the sheep got in ... and those that believed in Jesus but did no Good works did not. You can find discussions on Lutheran sites with respect to this passage - and the Lutheran I read was troubled by it - because it does seem to contradict sola fide.

While this passage is far more clear than your passage .. The stuff I posted from the Sermon on the Mount - an entire Sermon that has as its main theme how one gets into heaven - is not vague and mysterious - it is very clear. Hence why the majority of Christianity does not accept Sola Fide - a salient point that you also ignore.