All the world religions can be placed in one of two camps: legalism or grace. Humankind does it or God does it. Salvation as a wage based on deeds done - or salvation as a gift based on Christ's death.
A legalist believes the supreme force behind salvation is you. If you look right, speak right, and belong to the right segment of the right group, you will be saved. The brunt of the responsibility doesn't lie within God; it lies within you.
The result? The outside sparkles. The talk is good and the step is true. But look closely. Listen carefully. Something is missing.
What is it? Joy.
What's there? Fear. (That you won't do enough.)
Arrogance. (That you have done enough.)
Failure. (That you have made a mistake.)
Legalism is a dark world.
Legalism is slow torture, suffocation of the spirit, amputation of one's dreams. Legalism is just enough religion to keep you, but not enough to nourish you.
So you starve. Your teachers don't know where to go for food, so you starve together. Your diet is rules and standards. No vitamins. No taste. No zest. Just bland, predictable religion.
Can I give you the down and dirty about legalism?
Legalism doesn't need God.
Legalism is the search for innocence - not forgiveness. It's a systematic process of defending self, explaining self, exalting self, and justifying self. Legalists are obsessed with self - not God.
Legalism puts the fear of man in you. It makes you approval-hungry. You become keenly aware of what others will say and think, and you do what it takes to please them. Conformity is not fun, but it's safe. The uniform doesn't fit, but it's approved, so you wear it. You don't know why you are marching or where you are going -- but who are you to ask questions? So you stay in step and plod down the path of least resistance.
And if you dare explore another trail, you must do so at night, like Nicodemus did.
We religious teachers like to control and manage. We like to define and outline. Structure and clarity are the friend of the preacher. But they aren't always the protocol of God.
Salvation is God's business. Grace is his idea, his work, and his expense.
"God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son so that whoever believes in him may not be lost, but have eternal life." (John 3:16)
Nicodemus has never heard such words. Never. He has had many discussions of salvation. But this is the first in which no rules were given. No system was offered. No code or ritual. "Everyone who believes can have eternal life in him," Jesus told him. Could God be so generous? Even in the darkness of night, the amazement is seen on Nicodemus's face. Everyone who believes can have eternal life. Not "everyone who achieves." Not "everyone who succeeds." Not "everyone who agrees." But "everyone who believes."
Note how God liberates the legalist.
39 Nicodemus, who earlier had come to Jesus at night, went with Joseph. He brought about seventy-five pounds of myrrh and aloes.40 These two men took Jesus' body and wrapped it with the spices in pieces of linen cloth, which is how they bury the dead.41 In the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden. In the garden was a new tomb that had never been used before.42 The men laid Jesus in that tomb. (John 19)
Strange how a man can go full circle in the kingdom. The one who'd come at night, now appears in the day. The one who crept through the shadows to meet Jesus now comes to the cross to serve Jesus. And the one who'd received the seed of grace now plants the greatest seed of all - the seed of eternal life.
quoted from pgs. 118-122 of He Still Moves Stones by Max Lucado
85 comments:
How should people be judged?
Should they be Judged by their race, color, language, and beliefs?
or
Should they be judged by their personality, their acts and deeds??
Should you be Judged by who you are or you should be judged by what you do?
Hello Usman, good to see you again. :)
You asked very good questions. I don't judge people by their ethnicity, color, language or culture....well, I try not to. I am far from perfect and, at times, find certain practices intolerable to my 21st century, western sensibilities, but I believe you know this already. Right? ;)
As for how people should be judged...I do think we tend to look at how others behave and how they act and *react* to others. I read once that it's easy to "act" a certain part, but much harder to "react" to a bad situation in the right way. I find this true of myself. It's much easier to play the part of a "good Christian girl" than always REACT like one when I am riled by contentious comments. I don't need to tell you that. :)
So, as humans we judge people by their deeds. If people are "good" and obey the rules and laws of the land, we deem them fine. If they are rebels who insist on doing things their own ways, we judge them law-breakers.
The point of this post was on the grace God offers in saving us. It's not based on a list of rules we keep, but on the work HE does in us. It's GOD doing something fantastic, not "look at how lovely and sweet and righteous Susanne is." It's **our Lord** getting the glory for doing a marvelous work in me rather than me getting the praise for how well I can walk the line.
I hope that makes sense.
Despite how I come across to you on other blogs at times, I do value your thoughts on life and I appreciate when you dialog with me so we can learn more from one another. Thank you for taking time to read and comment. I look forward to more talks with you in the future, Lord willing.
Take care.
Susanne,
I think you sort of avoided my question. Let me rephrase it a bit more.
Q: In any Justice System, How should People be Judged? Should they be Judged by what they believe or should they be Judged by what they did?
In the Court of God, after this life, How would God the Ultimate and Supreme Judge should Judge people in his Perfect Court of Justice? Should he say that hummm, Susanne thinks so and so, hence she is rewarded and Usman thinks so and so hence he deserves punishment.Or should God say hummm, Susanne did this crime/sin hence punishment for this one, and she did this virtue hence reward for this one?
If you don't like my question, I won't mind and quit. But I would be very interested to know some of the answers form you. I have a lot of questions on this issue. I guarantee you this debate will not go harsh.
I'm sorry I didn't think I'd avoided your question, but since you were kind enough to rephrase it for me, let me give it a shot.
"Q: In any Justice System, How should People be Judged? Should they be Judged by what they believe or should they be Judged by what they did?"
Their actions; not beliefs -- we all don't think the same actions are wrong so society has a standard we must keep
"Should he say that hummm, Susanne thinks so and so, hence she is rewarded and Usman thinks so and so hence he deserves punishment.Or should God say hummm, Susanne did this crime/sin hence punishment for this one, and she did this virtue hence reward for this one?"
I think it's important to know what God requires for salvation. My opinion and your opinion don't matter. God's standard matters. Very much.
If we believe God punishes and rewards based on actions then we should act according to the rules. But how many rules do we have to keep before we are "good enough" for eternity with God? What if God demands perfection? What if he demands 75% good or maybe only 51% will do? What is the standard?
Feel free to ask more questions if you have them.
If God didn't make us perfect then why should he expect us to act perfect?
Standard? What Standard?, What is a "standard" of being good American? Same way what is a "standard" of being good human?
Good or bad are always clear. Don't you know that murdering is bad, helping poor is good etc etc. Hence rules are clear and simple. And they stem to common sense rather than any scriptures.
I am a non christian. I don't believe in Christ the savior. According to teaching of Christianity, I am resident of hell. No matter how much good work I do, no matter what I do, I am oft to go to hell. on the other hand, if somebody who is a christian, he will always find his place in heaven. He could be a very good christian and good human, avoiding crimes and doing virtue, or he could be a very bad human and bad christian, doing all sorts of evil. But since he believes in Jesus as his savior, he is oft to go to heaven. Jesus is his "savior". He will "save" him.
Take another example. It might be uncomfortable for you but it is rational. Take the example of Nazi Germany, largely a Christan army. Very very bad Christians, I agree, but after all majority of them were christian, believed in Christ as savior. Hence Jesus has got to save them form their sins. On the other hand all the innocent Jews are already burning in hell by now, Simply because they were not believer of Savior.
My question is Do you believe this? Where is Justice here? Or is there any concept of Justice in Christianity?
Hello again, Usman. Great questions.
"Don't you know that murdering is bad, helping poor is good etc etc. Hence rules are clear and simple. And they stem to common sense rather than any scriptures."
Yes, many people think that knowing to do good comes from our own consciences and perhaps we are somewhat programmed that way. This is why we feel guilty when we do wrong. Then again there are things in scripture that go against what most everybody would do naturally. Like overcoming evil with good. I really want to see this tried in the world to see if it works! :)
"No matter how much good work I do, no matter what I do, I am oft to go to hell. on the other hand, if somebody who is a christian, he will always find his place in heaven. He could be a very good christian and good human, avoiding crimes and doing virtue, or he could be a very bad human and bad christian, doing all sorts of evil. But since he believes in Jesus as his savior, he is oft to go to heaven. Jesus is his "savior". He will "save" him. "
I'll explain my understanding of things. First God sets the standard and a Holy God demands perfection.
Which ... we cannot meet.
The Bible is clear "There is none that does good. Not even one."
and
"All have sinned and come short of God's glorious standard."
So are we doomed? If justice prevailed then yes.
But if God reached out in love, mercy and grace and provided a way for us to be cleansed and meet that glorious standard then perhaps there is a chance for all of us!
This is what the post is about. Legalism says I can work for my salvation. If I do enough, if I look right, talk right, pray right...I can be worthy of heaven.
The grace way says, "I am not worthy at all. There is *nothing* I can do to merit heaven. BUT - as the Bible says - GOD demonstrated his great love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."
At the cross justice and mercy met together. How? God's justice demanded payment for our sins, but God's mercy meant HE - the ONLY perfect One - paid for it. That's why it's a gift! We don't earn it. It's a gift from our all-loving God.
As for those Nazi Christians you referred to ... the Bible is clear that true followers of Christ won't murder others or continue in sin! No we aren't perfect, but we cannot habitually sin and harbor unconfessed sin in our lives and claim we are "saved by Jesus."
Jesus saves us and changes us! We do good works as a RESULT OF salvation. So anyone killing in the name of Christianity or sinning otherwise is suspect. Only God knows people's hearts and, of course, He can extend mercy to whomever He chooses, however, a true follow of Jesus will live as he did.
Did Jesus murder?
Did Jesus steal?
Did Jesus commit adultery?
Not at all. So don't dismiss Jesus in the Bible because of horrible examples among those who claim his name. Just as you know of Muslims who do not act according to Islamic principles, the same can be true of people who claim all faiths.
Hope this helps!
First of all, We shall not bring the scripture in this discussion. Otherwise, I can quote from Quran, but that would be meaningless for you since you don't believe in that. You will keep quoting form bible, again meaningless for me since I don't believe it is the word of god. Hence we must find the common ground for discussion. Which is common sense. All the arguments here should be justified by logic and common sense rather that "I believe", "I feel" Or "in the scriptures".
Yes there, are Muslims. Who do lot of evil things, murder, rape, etc. But their crimes do not make them non Muslims. And their being Muslims does not guarantee them to be saved form hell fire. They stand for their act and deeds and will be judged by their acts and deeds.
But what about Christian? Is there no bad christian? A christian who does murder, rape or theft is not a christian anymore? Any christian who does sin or crime is not a christian anymore? By that logic no man is christian then.
As for the "Perfection" and "Standard" issue. As I said earlier. Only God is perfect. Nothing else is perfect. Human being are not perfect. Hence God is not silly. And It is silly to argue that God demands man to be perfect. If He would want man to be perfect he would have mad man sinless, which is obviously not the case here.
A person who does a murder. What does common sense and logic applies? He should be sent to jail or hanged. Or If there is perfect God, He should put him in hell for some time for his punishment.
Or
Does the common sense say, check the man's belief, christian; give him heaven, non christian; put him in hell.
MY questions in previous post are still unanswered.
Note: Since this blog is of religious tone, and since I felt that my discussion relates to the subject you are discussing in the post, hence this discussion. Again, If you mind, I will quit. I don't mean to attack your belies and faith.
Your continued questions are fine and good. I'm just sorry I cannot answer them to your satisfaction. I do try! :)
There are people in America who believe they are Christian simply because they were born into a family that went to church, perhaps believes in Jesus and so forth. However, I don't believe people are "born Christian." I think being a follower of Jesus is a choice each person makes or doesn't make.
So, my point is..there are people who will tell you they are Christian YET they do not follow Jesus. Don't get so caught up on labels. Following Jesus is way more important to me than being considered "Christian" by you or another other person. So if you see a "Christian" who is doing evil things chances are that person is NOT following Jesus.
And - sorry I have to use Scripture here - Jesus never told us to call ourselves "Christians," go join the local church, do this rule and that, he said, "Follow me" and "abide in me and you will produce good deeds."
I (try to!) follow the example of Jesus and believe he is the way to the Father.
As to your last comment...yes, there is justice in Christianity, but it's not my focus usually. I am often so caught up in God's mercy to me that I downplay the justice. But I do know God says vengeance is HIS and that HE will repay. So maybe this is why I don't worry about vengeance and justice so much.
Thank you again for your questions. I'm sorry if I use "I believe" and the Bible too much for your liking. I thought you wanted my opinion and didn't realize that meant I had to throw my faith out the window! :)
Feel free to ask anything else and continue the discussion. I don't mind at all.
I'm headed to bed though...but, God willing, I'll answer tomorrow morning.
Yes I know If I meet a christian who is doing bad thing and I will agree that He is NOT following Jesus. But does that make him non Christian? After all with all his sins, He is the believer of Christ the savior and Trinity.
Also, by your own logic, at what point your christian will be "truly following the Christ". Since I believe you can't find that perfect christian. Hence all the christian just like any other human being are more or less sinful. Thus a murderer, a rapist, if he truly believed in Jesus the Savior before his death bed, is bad christian. But christian after all, hence in an eternal heaven. Where as non christian is in hell hole.
This lack of Justice in Christianity, I believe is the Fundamental flaw. People want Justice, If not in this world, if not in man's court then in the other world in God's court.
We are not throwing our faith out of the window. We are just trying to engage in common ground to come to terms with each other.
Usman, yes, I understand yours and many others' need for justice. I'm sorry my answers are not satisfactory for you. As I said last night, God told us vengeance was HIS to repay so I guess justice is in His hands. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about justice can help you.
I'm thankful for God's mercy. The Bible teaches we all deserve hell because we are all sinners. So justice is hell for every single one of us who have ever sinned. It's only because of GOD's mercy and compassion that He makes it possible for us to have eternal life with Him one day.
Yes, there are plenty of "Christians" who will be in hell. As I stated, it's not what you call yourself, it's who you follow. If you trust in your good works or a label then it's not enough. Jesus told us HE is the Way to the Father so that's why I said we should follow him.
Thanks for sharing your point of view.
Usman, if I may jump in here... doesn't the Quran state that you have to believe in One God to at least have a chance of jannah? Isn't that unfair too?
And isn't there mercy and forgiveness of sins in Islam too, which also goes against justice?
I don't really see much of a difference.
I think we need to throw out the concept of reward and punishment altogether because it is only effective for small children and pets. For adults we are supposed to develop into an empathy-based morality but rewards and punishments keep us stuck at the childlike level. Grace takes a step towards removing the concepts of reward and punishment, but I personally want it to go even further.
Interesting. But this question of how should people be judged: by what they believe or by what they do is sort of a false one.
A person will act according to their beliefs. If one is truly a Christian, someone who has accepted Christ and follows Him to the best of their imperfect ability, they will not run around doing un-Christian things. Their beliefs will inform their actions. And as humans, all we can judge on is what we see a person do, since we are not God, and cannot know what is really in their hearts.
But, a person can act in one way - meet all the expectations of society or faith, and not really believe the tenets behind what they are doing. And that might fool other humans. But not God. He knows. He knows if you're doing a, b, c, d under the belief that if you do it *just so* it will pay back for your sin and you will be saved. And that's just not true. Actions alone cannot save us, spiritually.
Christianity is an internal change that will be reflected in our external actions, but performing good works, externally, without faith, is fruitless in the long run.
As for the death bed conversion: what is it based on? Is the person confessing Christ because of fear of death? Or because they truly believe and repent of offending God? One way is accepted, the other is not. And who are we, as fallen and fallible humans, to judge whom God decides to have mercy on?
Should we dictate who gets into Heaven and who doesn't based on our flawed sense of justice?
Susanne,
"we all deserve hell because we are all sinners. So justice is hell for every single one of us who have ever sinned."
NO,
We do sins AND we do virtues. There is no man on earth who is doing sins all the time in all of his life. There is no man on earth who is doing virtues all the time in all of his life. So Justice is hell for the sins of an Individual, and Justice is heaven for the virtues of the Same individual.
From Sarah;
"Quran state that you have to believe in One God to at least have a chance of jannah? Isn't that unfair too?"
If you read my comments carefully, You will notice that nowhere I am bringing the scripture in the discussion. I am not defending or presenting the case of Islam or Quran here.
As for your question, a number of legendary Islamic scholars have different opinions. According to them (and it is also my belief) that No matter who you are, You will get the reward and the punishment for the good and bad you did in your life time. If you are not a believer of one God then you will get the punishment for not believing in one god. But believing or not believing in him will not take away your virtues that you don in your life. None of your virtues will be wasted. None of your sin will go unnoticed. I don't wanna go for the interpretations of scripture here or I will loose the focus of discussion which excludes the scriptures.
Sarah said;
"And isn't there mercy and forgiveness of sins in Islam too, which also goes against justice?"
If I do a crime and sin against you then you and only you have the choice to forgive me for the sin and crime that I did against you. God, God's "child" or any other third person or Prophet has no say in it. If they intervene in this forgiveness then it won't be Justice. Hence Justice demands that either victim forgives the sinner, take some exchange or let the sinner suffer the punishment. There is no third logical possibility in the spirit of Justice.
Sarah said;
"I think we need to throw out the concept of reward and punishment altogether because it is only effective for small children and pets"
Sure, Go ahead and lock down your courts and abolish all the Justice system in your country and put an "empathy-based morality". But oh boy, we are talking about logic and rationalities, not fantasies.
Sarah said:
"Grace takes a step towards removing the concepts of reward and punishment, but I personally want it to go even further."
If a criminal kills your child, It would be very interesting to see him not suffering any punishment and walking with you hand in had in the garden of heaven.
Please, Go with common sense!
Amber,
A person does things for several reasons. Even if his beliefs and intentions behind his virtues are bad. He is still doing virtue and serving someone. Hence Justice demands, he should be punished for his bad intentions and be rewarded for his virtues which he actually performed. No complication here. For a man mad court it would be difficult. For God, it is not difficult, he knows the intention and he knows the act.
Amber said;
"Should we dictate who gets into Heaven and who doesn't based on our flawed sense of justice?"
Ma'am you really are dictating who goes to heaven by believing this and that. And I ask you ladies, If my sense of Justice is "flawed" then what is your concept and sense of Justice??
If Justice is not that; Sins lead to punishment, virtue and good leads to reward, then What is Justice according to you??
NOTE: I would like to continue this discussion one on one only with Susanne for a number of reasons. If you other ladies also keep a religious blog and have such a post, I will get there and engage with you. But not here in "Panel like debate" due to the sensitivity and depth of the topic. If you still resist, then please feel free to leave your comments, "score the point" and quit. I won't care. I will to continue this question answer with Susanne as long as she wants and continues. Thanks
I have done this discussion with Muslims, Christians and people of other faiths. Interesting how people bends even the simple logic just to suit it to their faiths and scriptures.
I always challenge them to base their argument on common sense and logic:
If there is a God...
He is the supreme Judge.
He should do some Justice.
And What is Justice?
Good receives good, bad receives bad
Any other option, anything else?
Or You have "God"
He is no Judge,
Does no Justice
Such "God" is not a "god".
We are left in the world with Satan only!
Usman,
a) My comment was not directed at you. It required no further input from you. Had it been directed at you, your name would have been at the top of it. Like so. *points up* Rather, my comment was a general one, based on points raised from the original post, and further discussed in the comments. If you don't want people reading what you write, don't write it.
b) While I certainly have no desire to converse any further with someone who has the arrogance and attitude that you display, this is not your blog, and unless and until Susanne asks me not to make commentary on something, I shall feel free to do so. You, in turn, should feel more than free not to read or comment on what I say. I'm certain that somehow, my life will continue on quite cheerfully, without your input.
c) Your concept, if one may call it that, seems flawed. But I won't waste my time telling you why.
d) I make no judgement on who is in Heaven or will be so, and who will not. That is God's power alone, and I am not arrogant enough to believe that I understand things which He has properly reserved for Himself. I base what I say purely on what He has revealed, and logic that flows from that.
e) Your 'justice' sounds more like the scales of Egyptian myth, where if one's soul weighed more than the feather of Maat, it was eaten. I'm quite thrilled not to have to please Anubis, or whatever god you believe in that has no mercy.
f) If you do a 'good' thing, for a 'bad' reason, you've undone the good in it, at least for yourself. Others may benefit, but you will not. Not in eternity.
Amber,
I am sorry. I did not mean to offend you or anybody. I am not arrogant. This is the way I write. And English is not my first language. There might be some misunderstanding in my expression, but this is not my intention.
I wanted this discussion one to one so that, I should not lost focus. It would be very difficult for my to keep track of the objections raised by 10 people, for example. I am not afraid of defending my stance. I just want to make it to the point, focus, and as polite as I can. Panel like debates are difficult for me. And You have to keep in mind that I am not speaking in my first language.
As I said earlier, If you keep a faith biased religious blog, and interested in such discussion, I will happy to join you there. But again, one on one.
You said; "I base what I say purely on what He has revealed"
Well, this is the problem. We don't know what he has revealed. What he has revealed is different according to christian. And it is different according to a Muslims or Jew. We need common ground. Which is common sense. Going back to the scriptures will be circling the debate.
Sarah, I appreciate what you had to say. Good point about rewards and punishments...hmmm.
Amber, thanks for chiming in here.
"Christianity is an internal change that will be reflected in our external actions, but performing good works, externally, without faith, is fruitless in the long run."
I liked that.
And you are right....God can have mercy on whomever He chooses. Thank you for pointing out that it's not so cut-and-dry as I made it out to be. :)
Usman, I'm glad you took the time to reply to Sarah's good questions. Interesting to read about the "spirit of Justice" according to Islam.
"NO,We do sins AND we do virtues."
The prophet Isaiah says all our good deeds are as filthy rags in God's eyes. I'd argue it's only when GOD works through us that we have the right actions *and* attitude. In other words, we do good works for the right (godly) reasons. Not just to avoid hell, but because God's goodness radiates through you and out to bless others.
I believe there is a God. He is the Supreme Judge. He has judged us all "guilty" YET He has extended grace. Why? Because He is Love. And as the Muslims say "merciful and compassionate." I don't know why you have a problem with that. We all should be thrilled! :)
Amber, you are MORE than welcome to reply to ANYTHING on this blog. If Usman wants to ignore others' comments, that's his right. But I enjoy reading ALL opinions and encourage all to comment freely! :)
Usman, I think you can handle the few people who comment here so don't worry. Thank you for sharing your point of view. You are welcome to comment and I appreciate you keeping things civil.
You are doing great replying in English! :)
Susanne,
This post and the commentary on it has made something clear to me:
Legalism grows out of humanity, not God. A legalistic religion is clearly man made, not divine.
The idea that God would offer His Grace and Forgiveness, when really nothing that we can do would earn it, is beyond the conception of the human mind.
It's more clear to me that logic alone leads to a human attempt to 'buy' oneself from ones own failures. As your post said: legalists don't need God. Which is good, since they don't know Him.
On a side note, I'm becoming rather fond of this Max Lucado fellow...
~~~
If we focus only on human logic, removing Scripture and God, then we must judge one another based on actions. The belief/intent behind that action no longer has any weight whatsoever because no man can know another's heart or mind. Even if one says, 'I meant such and such when I did that.' we have no way of knowing if they are truthful, and must judge solely on the outcome of their actions. This is the sum of human ability and limitation in justice. It is flawed and imperfect in the scope of eternity, which won't actually, matter in this argument, since without allowing for God, there is nothing but this life. Such a sad state of being.
Susanne,
"we do good works for the right (godly) reasons. Not just to avoid hell"
An atheist doing good work and philanthropy, not because he is afraid of hell and in the greed of heaven. He is doing it due to his share of good human being in him. I mean, there is no soul completely evil or completely good. We all have our good humane and evil part. Which one is used most is the key to success or failure.
You said; "And as the Muslims say "merciful and compassionate." I don't know why you have a problem with that. "
Sure, God is merciful and compassionate. We are enjoying the blessings in our life due to his mercy and compassion. And he the merciful and compassionate will not waste or reject my virtues just because I didn't believe in him (or his "son"). And Whoever did sin and crime against me, the merciful and compassionate will held that sinner and criminal accountable for his crimes and sins. This goes for every human being on earth.
Amber, when I read what Max Lucado wrote about legalism I was struck with how true it was. He has a great way of putting things into pictures..that's why I've included so many pictures when I've posted from his book. :) This book has made me stop and reflect. It's simple reading, but deep in its own way.
I like what you concluded about legalism. And really we must all guard against it. I know many legalistic Baptists and can be that way myself at times. Thanks much for what you shared. It was encouraging to me. :)
Usman, thanks for sharing your point of view. I think we all understand now that your God uses scales. Hopefully we'll all tip the good side enough to meet in heaven one day.
Susanne,
"I think we all understand now that your God uses scales. "
The point I am trying to establish is totally the opposite. My God is using NO scale. He is not putting people in hell or heaven just because they are christian or Muslim or Jew or atheist. He is judging every individual in it's own. To him, every individual, every virtue has value. Doesn't matter it comes from Muslim, Jew, Christian or Atheist.
You said; "Hopefully we'll all tip the good side enough to meet in heaven one day."
You don't have to tip the good side enough. It is not the game of getting 51%. I have cleared it already in my previous comment. Even the "1%" (if using your rhetoric) virtue will not be wasted. Even the "1%" sin will not be ignored.
So it doesn't matter what you believe as long as you do good. Muslims, Jews, atheists, Christians -- we're all good (and bad) and will be rewarded for all the good we do and will have to be punished for the bad. So labels don't matter. I agree on that.
Susanne,
Beliefs will also be held accountable. That said, an atheist will be held accountable for his not believing in God. What I am stressing is that, his (atheist's) virtues will not be vanished because of his not believing in God etc. In the same way, if you have done a virtue with a bad intention. Your will be held accountable both for your virtue and intentions behind. Intention will get you suffer, and virtue will get you your reward.
Usman, thank you for sharing that. It seems it doesn't matter our label. In the end we are accountable for our beliefs, actions or inaction. Fair enough. I appreciate your explanation.
Susanne, I didn’t comment on this post because I don’t believe in the Christian concept of salvation. But then I thought why can’t I offer a couple of opinions :)
You quoted Christ as saying “Everyone who believes can have eternal life in him," Jesus told him.” That is what made me comment. I think every religion says the same thing – Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Judaism etc. The way I read the Bible I don’t think Jesus was saying “Everyone who believes I died to wash away their sins can have eternal life in God.” I think what he meant was anyone who believes in one God will automatically do good and when they do good they will have eternal life in God.
Not every Christian believes that Lord means God for Jesus and that Son of God is as literal as we think it is. I don’t think Unitarians believe that at all and I do know that many Unitarian Christians believe that Jesus didn’t die for our sins. Arians certainly didn’t believe or preach that neither did the Nazarenes.
As a non-Christian who was not raised into Christianity I read the same passages from the Bible in a completely different manner. So to me John 3:15, John 20:31, John 5:11 all say the same thing – if you accept Jesus you will follow his perfect example and when you follow his example (which is perfect and the bar is raised so even if you can’t reach the stars, you will hit the ceiling) you will do good. That is why we are sent to Earth.
If we believe in the story of Adam and Eve then it makes little sense for God to throw us out of Heaven so he could judge us not on deeds but grace. He judged Adam and Eve on their deeds – obedience and the lack of it rather than their belief in Jesus for according to Trinitarian Christianity Jesus existed even then.
I sincerely believe there is a lot of goodness in Christianity and although there are many Christians in the world there would have been a lot more if people were not asked to believe in Trinity or salvation. I feel that Jesus’ message was so open and global or endearing and simple but we have failed to properly understand it and have instead put a lot of conditions on that message.
What do you think?
Thanks Susanne for politely engaging with me. I appreciate that you tolerated my presence and my discussion on your blog. As for your friends, once again I will make it clear that, I am not offending or down playing their opinion. I held myself in short discussion with only one person due to my own inability in coherently engaging in panel like debate and my language barrier. Hope you can understand.
Thanks!
Suroor, I really love when you offer opinions even if they differ from mine. As you pointed out on your own blog yesterday, I am well aware of your beliefs concerning Jesus' divinity -- and really I have no problem with it! I love you so your opinions matter very much to me!! In other words, please never hesitate to challenge me by sharing YOUR thoughts on whatever topic arises. Deal? :)
Now that we have that settled, I greatly enjoyed your comment. I actually read it right when you sent it and I've been mulling it over in my head off and on ever since. (Four hours ago.)
I'm glad you shared what those verses meant to you as one who grew up and continues to be nonChristian. It's often good to hear/read what "outsiders" of a faith see when they read verses and creeds. Definitely you've given me much food for thought.
As for Jesus pointing to only those who believe in one God being OK -- don't you think this isn't entirely "universal" since many don't believe in one God, but still you think are good people? Or maybe believing in only one God isn't necessary and only good works are required? I agree that by following Jesus we can at least hope to reach the ceiling! :-D
I like the example you gave of Adam and Eve. I never said sin didn't have consequences. If you have unprotected sex with a whore, you might end up with an STD. God can and will still forgive you if you repent, but that doesn't free you from the consequences of your sinful deed. (Kind of like the examples from David's life which I wrote about on your blog yesterday.)
So Adam and Eve deliberately disobeyed God and were punished, but I don't think this meant they were damned for hell with no hope of redemption. Even in this story you see God's grace for He provided covering (clothes) for them at the expense of an animal. And death was introduced to the world - I believe, so we would not have to live forever in our sinful conditions. Death is actually the gateway from this life full of pain to a wonderful life with God if we fellowship and have relationship with Him. Notice with the first couple GOD went looking for them, clothed them and ultimately restored relationship with them. So I see grace in this story. I see GOD at work...man was ashamed and hiding. He wasn't even being "legalistic" because he KNEW he was wrong..so he hid. Yet God found Him.
I do agree that we often have too many conditions in Christianity -- things that aren't God's conditions.(Hey, this legalism post stepped on MY toes... it wasn't necessarily for religions that have wagon loads of rules and rituals.) So maybe you are right and God will lead me to drop the ungodly conditions and only have His. I hope for that. :)
Thanks again for your wonderful comment! I look forward to more from you!
Usman, it was my pleasure to discuss things with you. I hope you will feel free to do it again if you see a topic that interests you in the future or on past posts. God bless. :)
I agree with Grace most definitely but I find it difficult to accept that God will not consider pardoning anyone who doesn’t accept Jesus as Godhead. And I can’t seem to understand God’s sacrifice of Jesus for redemption. What I have understood so far is that God is one, He created a perfect and sinless human being as the best example and sent him to earth to preach in His name. This perfect example may have been His actual first creation even before Adam. He gave this man, Jesus, divine qualities to heal and cure, bring dead to life and turn water into wine. He also gave him full authority to preach in His name so he never needed constant revelations like His other prophets. With all these qualities: virgin birth, sinlessness, and the ability to heal/cure/give life, this perfect creation called himself the Son of Man and sometimes the (symbolic) Son of God.
Now when you follow this perfect example you will not wage wars, commit adultery or any other sin of the skin, will bite your tongue and slap your wrist, will not raid and steal from poor, will be kind and humble towards women and men, will not divorce your wives for no good reason, and will never be quick to judge.
So ultimately whoever believes in Jesus will believe in one God and whoever believes in one God will follow Jesus’ example. Thus that is God’s Grace. His Grace is that he gave us Jesus.
You know it is a myth that not everyone believes in one God. Even the polytheists, pagans, Hindus, idol-worshippers believe in One Supreme God. Even in pre-Islamic poetry and literature there is the mention of the most powerful, the greatest God, Al-Lah (literally The God) and hence the term Allahu Akbar, literally meaning The God is Greater [than all other gods]. Islam ended all those minor gods and established the worship of One Omnipotent God in Arabia. Even the Quran mentions that when you ask these polytheists who brings down the rain and grows the crops they will say Allah.
Similar to pre-Islamic paganism is Hinduism that has many gods which are incarnations of one supreme God. (That is why some people have started to call Christianity as polytheism – I read it first here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_deities#Avatars_as_incarnations_of_God).
I think the only people who will be in real trouble are the atheists :)
Even they do good but don't accept God or His grace and so they are the ones who will perhaps be judged for their good deeds and rewarded and judged for not accepting God's grace and punished for it. But I feel the reward will certainly not be "eternal life in God." That is only reserved for those who accept God, His grace and do good by following the perfect example.
According to Muslims and Jews, Monotheism is One in One. And anything other than One in One is polytheism; i-e many or many in one. It is offensive to say to a Hindu that he believes or worships in several gods. What actually they claim is not different from Christianity. They say that these are not "many gods". They are avatars of one god. Hence all these million things that they worship are "million in one". Just like Christians claims 3 in 1, according to Trinity.
I then often ask this question from Christians that at what number Monotheism differs from Polytheism? It is certainly not One in One for them, or the concept of Trinity gets collapsed. But why stop at 3? why not go further with 5 in 1, 10 in 1 or million in one? You can include Hinduism in Polytheist religions. But then you end up in very bizarre territory. You can even consider ancient Greeks and Roman Pagans "monotheist" by this definition.
Christian apologists have gone a log way to defend Trinity as monotheism. And in their attempt, they have twisted even the simple logic to blur the distinction between simple notions monotheism and polytheism.
Suroor - how do you know atheists don't also accept God and his grace? Couldn't God be bigger than the religious definitions which atheists have rejected? Since there are so many religious definitions that might be acceptable, why not open it up further to non-religious definitions?
I think humanistic morality is greater than reward-and-punishment morality and is closer to the idea of grace, actually. Grace is about the threat of hell being removed, and that is certainly the case for atheists. So arguably they do believe in grace. They do good for the sake of good.
I'd like to know as well why you think God is so desperate to be believed in, and so spiteful towards people who couldn't.
Good questions to think about Sarah! I was merely using examples religious people give. My own theory began with "What I have understood so far..." and ended with "His Grace is that he gave us Jesus." I'm sorry my writing wasn't clear.
I don't think even Jesus would have judged atheists and I'm certainly no one to judge them when God is the ultimate judge.
Personally I don't think God cares about who is worshiping Him and who isn't. We think of God as a Big Parent and think that like we would be hurt if one of our children is disobedient and doesn't love us, that God too will be all sensitive and hurt. I don't think He gives a care. I'm sure he would just be shrugging His Big Shoulders at such people. ALL religions make God behave like a human. God is angry, jealous, sad, laughs aloud, loves, hates. Then every religion points fingers at the other for worshiping a man or other living beings!
IMO, it is far more important to be a good person because that is what He won't forgive.
What do you mean by "non-religious definitions"? I was talking about people like Dawkins who say there is no god, full stop. I don't mind that but the concept of God itself was invented by religions so I don't see the point of trying to look for alternate definitions of God if you don't believe in one or if it is in case just a myth.
I mean if I was an atheist who believed that there was no god and that there was a Big Bang and whatever, I would be invoking/referring to the Universe or Science or whatever but what difference does it make even if I bring in an alternate definition if I don't believe in Creation?
Suroor - sorry, I misunderstood. You know how upset we all get when someone says we'll be rejected by God for our beliefs. :) Not that I'm an official atheist, but I do strongly sympathise with their position as you probably know.
Re non-religious definitions, have you heard of pantheism and panentheism? If they are adequate descriptions, then scientists who marvel at the wonders of the universe are actually worshipping God. Whether they call it God or not.
I don't think it's possible to say what is an adequate description of reality though. I guess that makes me an agnostic. I feel humility dictates that it has to be a mystery, at least for me. I might call that mystery "God" or I might not.
Suroor, thanks for your follow-up comment. I thoroughly enjoyed that! :)
Usman, thanks for your thoughts on why I'm a polytheist. :)
Sarah, I'm glad you came back to offer further food for thought.
I enjoyed it, all!
Sarah, No I don't know much about pantheism and panentheism. Maybe I'll read on that tonight :) Thanks for drawing my attention to it. I have been into religions for so long that I have never really thought about the complexities of Atheism or how they behave and think. That is my loss. One can't be at peace with one's beliefs without trying to understand the beliefs of others.
Susanne, I think people have given you a lot of grief over Christianity being polytheistic on blogs :D When I didn't know much about it I used to treat it associating others with God aka shirk aka polytheism. A Christian would not understand it because the core concept of One God is missing from Christian theology and so you can't understand the non-Christian position which seems rude and often it is meant to be rude.
But like in Judaism, there is prophecy that the Son of God will come to earth one day so I can't understand how that is a monotheistic religion either. I mean OK that son according to them is still with God but there is the prophecy of the Messiah, Son of God, Prince of Peace, right? Am I wrong?
That leaves Sikhism and Islam. Quranists actually believe and preach that all non-Quranist Muslims are polytheistic! I swear. I'll search for their sites and give you links if you interested. Their argument is that when Sunnis say the Kalimah they include Muhammad in it as the Rasul which is shirk. Shias include Muhammad and Ali. Ismailis have a different kalima. According to Quranists the pure kalima is There is no God but God. That is all. They also reject hadith and don't send blessings on Muhammad during prayers because prayer is a worship for God alone and including Muhammad in it is shirk. There is a sect of Shias who believe Ali was Allah incarnate and Quranists attack them furiously. They also claim that the Hajj is a completely pagan ritual that is hevaily focused on stones that should have no place in the monotheistic religion of Islam. Very interesting stuff!
Sikhism has bits of shirk in it as well so in the end if we all point fingers at the other, there will be no religion left to claim complete monotheistic belief!
Suroor, ha! Well, most people don't give much grief to me about Christian polytheism. I was kind of teasing Usman since I didn't know what else to say to him. :)
I do understand that 3 in 1 is difficult to understand. I just happen to figure if God is bigger and greater than I, I do NOT have to understand Him. In fact, if I did, He'd be a pretty small God. My brain (sense of understanding) isn't that impressive! :)
I think of it this way -- God is God and He can reveal Himself to us however He wishes. For some it's dreams and visions, for others He may speak through nature (e.g. Moses and the burning bush), for others it may be through books, songs, poetry, whatever. So I don't believe it's that impossible for God to reveal Himself to the world through Jesus. If God chose to put on human flesh and human limitations to feel our pain and reach us, so be it. If He reveals Himself through His Word, His Spirit - whatever, so be it. I don't limit God and claim God is not One by dismissing the *possibility* that the One God can reveal Himself in millions of ways. Shoot, maybe even "Trinity" -- 3 in 1 -- is limiting God! ;-)
I believe Muslims commit shirk in their own ways. They just don't see it, but any outsider can see idolatry of Muhammad and Quran for what it is.
I enjoyed what you had to say. Thanks for your comment!
"Their argument is that when Sunnis say the Kalimah they include Muhammad in it as the Rasul which is shirk."
"Shirk"means Polytheism. Which means you include somebody in the deity. That is you believe that this thing or this person is God, Part of God, share some qualities, rulership, or characteristics of God. And you pray to him just like you pray to god.
A Prophet or Messenger is none the above. Nobody prays to him. Nobody argue that he is part of the deity. Nobody argues that he shares some characteristic of God. Everybody believes that A prophet or Messenger is Just a person, a human like us, but a very gentle, a very perfect one. So Muslims believe that Muhammad, Jesus, Moses, and Abraham etc are Messengers and Prophets.
Muslims do NOT pray in the name of Muhammad. In Muslims prayer, they pray to God to send the blessing on them and on their prophet. That said they ask the ONE god to send the blessing on everybody. Muslims do not pray to Muhammad to give us this or that, or bless us with this or that. Muhammad is Just a man, a creature of the creator. He can't give anybody anything.
Your understanding of the basic vocabulary are quite flawed!
"If God chose to put on human flesh and human limitations to feel our pain and reach us, so be it."
I am a male. I cannot feel the female's pain in certain condition. The only way for me to know their pains or to feel, is to transform myself into a female. God is above of these notions. He is the creator, and knows even before the birth of a man and woman that what are their pains. He does not need to transform himself in order to gain some knowledge or feeling. God does godly things, man does manly things. Putting the god in the place of man makes the God smaller, not bigger.
Usman, "He is the creator, and knows even before the birth of a man and woman that what are their pains. He does not need to transform himself in order to gain some knowledge or feeling."
Your point is very good, however, my point is that IF God *chose* to come to earth as flesh, HE COULD.
If you say otherwise, you are limiting God.
So my point is that His coming to earth is a possibility. That's all.
God can also *choose* to do monkey chants. But if he would do, he would diminish himself since he would not be doing a godly act. Just like I could diminish my personality If I started monkey chants.
I know this example sounds funny, but it has a point in it.
"Your understanding of the basic vocabulary are quite flawed!"
Usman, you are very quick to pass judgments, aren't you? Is that all you have learned? I didn't want to annoy you. So think before you annoy others.
I wasn't talking to you. Like you don't want to talk to anyone here but Susanne and are scared of a panel debate with women, I deserve the same right to talk only to people I choose.
I have a lot of Muslimness in me as well and can claim an eye for an eye. I don't turn the other cheek always so don't think I'm a pushover.
You desperately need a reading teacher and if English is not your language, stick to Urdu blogs rather than use it as an excuse! Weird that your English is perfect when it comes to using it to spit venom.
I wrote Quranists believe that... I'm not a Quranist. I was offering SUSANNE a fact, not giving an opinion on a fact. Instead of learning what other people think (right or wrong) you try to shove your opinions on everyone. I'm sick of your closed-minded attitude.
NEVER EVER try to talk down at me again!
Usman,
'Your understanding of the basic vocabulary are quite flawed!'
I'm going to chalk this up to English not being your first language, and give you the benefit of that doubt. Suroor was not saying, in the first place, that this is what she believes. She was giving examples of what various sects of Islam use to accuse other sects of polytheism. So your accusation that she doesn't understand the vocabulary she's using is unfounded. Second, the way your phrased it is extremely rude.
And while I find the irony of you telling everyone to 'butt out' of your conversation with Susanne and then choosing to engage people who (again) aren't speaking to you quite delicious, I'm going to butt in. Feel free to ignore me. Please.
Your comparison between you being unable to become a woman in order to understand her is flawed. God has no need to become anything to understand. He did not become Incarnate for Himself. He become Incarnate for us. He did not choose to become man to learn from us, but to teach us.
Why are you trying to limit God based on *your* limitations?
Maybe, if you were a god, you would choose not to Incarnate because you would gain nothing from it, but thankfully, you're not, so we don't have to worry about that problem. We have a God who loves us, and who chose to come down to our level so that He could teach us.
"have a lot of Muslimness in me as well and can claim an eye for an eye."
What does that mean?
"You desperately need a reading teacher and if English is not your language, stick to Urdu blogs rather than use it as an excuse!"
I have long stuck with Urdu, Muslim and Arab blogoshpere, and I still am. I found that those blogs were swarmed by non Muslims who come and spit their share of venom. So, I thought why shouldn't I come to their blog and say "hi".
So, Hi!
consult with 99% Muslims and Jews. They will tell you what is fact, instead of digging out an obscure cult called "quranists".
Susanne, you said "I believe Muslims commit shirk in their own ways. They just don't see it, but any outsider can see idolatry of Muhammad and Quran for what it is."
Yes, I have heard that. How do you think Quran is shirk? I have heard that including Muhammad as an intercessor and believing that Allah gets jealous and angry when people annoy Muhammad is often believed by Christians as a form of associating someone with God, but I haven't heard the Quran argument before.
Someone had given us a framed embroidery piece that read, "Ya Muhammad" and my father asked us to remove that because only Allah is worthy of invoking with "Ya Allah." Most non-Arabic Muslims don't realise that, but majority of Muslims actually don't give Muhammad the revered status he receives in South Asia, for example.
In the KSA celebrating Muhammad's birthday is banned and one only gets holidays on Eid; not even for Mairaj and Shabaan. In South Asia, milaads are very popular which are like poems written and *sung* in honour of Muhammad calling him the beloved, Allah's most loved one and other such qualities. That is completely banned in the Arab world and Arabic Muslims are actually horrified to know this happens. But in South Asia that is so common many times such poems (called Naat) are sung before Friday prayers start.
But then you also have people like the mufti in Egypt who published an essay stating that people used to drink Muhammad's urine! He was severely punished for writing that, though.
I have heard people saying Muhammad didn't have a shadow because he was supernatural etc but many Muslims don't believe that.
I think Islam and Muslims are not monolithic. Before I came to Arabia I thought all Muslims are the same, but they even differ in basic beliefs like I mentioned.
I think I have digressed too much from the topic of the post! Sorry :)
Usman, monkey chants made me smile. :)
Amber, "He did not choose to become man to learn from us, but to teach us. " -- Loved that! Thank you!
Usman, you are welcome here on my nonMuslim blog, and I don't mind opposing points of view. Just know if you dismiss someone directing a comment at you, she may respond in kind if you start commenting on her comment. Did *anyone follow all that? :-/
"but they even differ in basic beliefs like"
These are not "basic beliefs", these are minor practices. Poetry to praise Muhammad (PBUH) was done even in his time by some of his companions.
Sure, 1.5 billion Muslims living in 60 or some countries do not spend identical lives. Their day to day practices and rituals differ all around the world. But basic beliefs stay the same. Fore example nobody has so far invented their own Quran, despite being 1400s has been passed. And on the contrary, we got dozens of bibles.
Feel free to get offended if you think I once again "talking down" at you.
Usman,
'God can just say "hail" and you will be hailed. He would just say "be taught" and you will taught. He does not even go through that tail that you alleged on him.'
Would you like to clue me in on why God is dropping frozen rain on my head? (Hail) Or did you mean heal?
'not even go through that tail'
I never alleged that God had a tail.
All that aside, what's your point? God may do (or not) anything that He chooses. He knows best. He chose to Incarnate in order to teach. Who am I that I should question that?
Oh, oh, wait. Are we allowed to bring revelations into this one now? I forget the 'rules'...must be all the hailing God's doing to me...
/end snark/
On a completely amusing note, my word verification word is 'ammagod'. Think it's a sign?
Suroor, I don't mind if you digress at all. I enjoyed reading all that about various Muslim practices.
You know the saying about actions speaking louder than words. Welllllll, when we have Christians who worship Jesus as God and try to follow Him, we are OK with it because, hey, that's their beliefs. They say He is God and so they follow and copy Him.
However, when Muslims strongly say they do NOT worship anyone but Allah, but then they copy and follow Muhammad to a greater extent than we copy Jesus. (We don't have nearly the extensive stuff that Muslims do copying Muhammad) then I say if your actions and words don't add up, then go with the actions. And Muslims - to me - worship Muhammad. They have Muhammad's life and even his *private practices* down to an art. That's just...sick in my opinion.
And then the Quran is supposedly the uncreated word of God...eternal as is God. How is that not making something equal with God? We believe Jesus is the eternal, uncreated Word of God, too. But there again, we admit we worship Jesus. Muslims protest.
Methinks the Muslims doth protest too much!
Btw, Muhammad's birthday is celebrated in Syria. Not by all Muslims, but enough of them that they have singings at the mosque for his birthday. Yet they won't celebrate Jesus' birthday. Hypocrites!
Please digress as much as you want!
Susanne,
I am not worried about anybody's attitude here, in fact I am surprised that you are quite decent. Otherwise, kind of talk non Muslims do on Muslim blogs is incomparable. Their sole purpose to come to Arab and Muslims blogs is to prove that Muhammad was a "dirty demon". Notice, I do not believe Jesus as "son of God" but I haven't come even near to insult his character or any christian holy personality in that regard.
"Would you like to clue me in on why God is dropping frozen rain on my head? (Hail) Or did you mean heal?
'not even go through that tail'
I never alleged that God had a tail."
Thanks for pointing out. I go back and correct it.
"He become Incarnate for us. He did not choose to become man to learn from us, but to teach us. "
God can just say "heal" and you will be healed. He would just say "be taught" and you will taught. He does not even go through that tale that you alleged on him.
(Thanks Amber for correcting my English)
You are very typical, Usman and typical has layers of meanings which I won't peel for you.
A Sufi dervish once taught me that the best response for an ignorant and rude man is silence. When you don't respond, they actually look like monkeys jumping up and down talking to themselves.
Thus, I won't stoop low to communicate with you again so you can continue your "monkey chants" that you were taught so well and can perform so wonderfully. I'll just sit and watch you dance; you look quite amusing doing it.
"You are very typical, Usman and typical has layers of meanings which I won't peel for you.
A Sufi dervish once taught me that the best response for an ignorant and rude man is silence. When you don't respond, they actually look like monkeys jumping up and down talking to themselves.
Thus, I won't stoop low to communicate with you again so you can continue your "monkey chants" that you were taught so well and can perform so wonderfully. I'll just sit and watch you dance; you look quite amusing doing it."
My amusement that you just read last line of my comments, get tossed off and then make your entire comment on it. I should find some way to handle my end sentence. How about this:
This very sentence you are reading should be ignored :)
"And then the Quran is supposedly the uncreated word of God...eternal as is God. How is that not making something equal with God? We believe Jesus is the eternal, uncreated Word of God, too. But there again, we admit we worship Jesus. Muslims protest."
Susanne, I never thought like that. Quite interesting - uncreated word Vs Uncreated Word.
BTW, are there still Christians who believe Jesus was created? I know that Unitarians in the UK believe that but I'm not sure about them in the US. I guess such Christians are very few today? What about the Jehovah's Witnesses?
The Quran calls Jesus the Word as well just like John but it is interpreted as a Message or Promise made by God to Mary. Interestingly, while John used it to describe Jesus' divinity, Hilali and Khan use it to describe his non-divinity - Allah said the Word to Mariam Be! And he (Jesus) was (that is he was created).
Suroor,
'How do you think Quran is shirk?'
If I may interject my understanding?
In an incredibly simplified, from memory version: Muslims view the Qur'an as the eternal, uncreated word of God, right? Which is how Christians view Christ. He is the Word, made Incarnate. So if it is 'shirk' for Christians to honor and worship Christ as a 'part' of God, then it must equally be 'shirk' for Muslims to honor and worship the Qur'an?
And if the Qur'an is *not* the eternal, uncreated word of God, but a created thing, then wouldn't it still be 'shirk' given the level of reverence that Muslims give to even translations of it (which aren't the 'real' Qur'an as they're not in Arabic)?
That's just what I understand, and I could, of course, be wrong. It does happen. Sometimes. :)
Heh. Ooops. I missed Susanne's reply which was the same. Sorry. :)
Usman,
All corrected English aside,
'God can just say "heal" and you will be healed. He would just say "be taught" and you will taught. He does not even go through that tale that you alleged on him.'
My reply remains the same. What is your point?
God may do (or not) anything that He chooses. He knows best. He chose to Incarnate in order to teach. Who am I that I should question that?
If God says to a thing, 'be such and such' it has no choice but to be so. As humans, this is problematic because God gave us free will. He refrains from simply making us do things because He wants us to use our free will, to make the choice to follow Him.
"worship the Qur'an?"
Tell me you just invented this so that you can feel you have a point
:)
Usman,
Nope. Muslims give the Qur'an the kind of reverence that I give to God. They appear to worship it. Which is where the view of their treatment of the Qur'an as possible 'shirk' comes into play.
Suroor, I don't know how all Christians believe. There are a wide variety of them. I generally speak concerning the vast majority of the ones I know. :)
Honestly, the ones I know consider Jehovah's Witnesses to be a cult. :)
Also from your comment ...
"The Quran calls Jesus the Word as well just like John but it is interpreted as a Message or Promise made by God to Mary. Interestingly, while John used it to describe Jesus' divinity, Hilali and Khan use it to describe his non-divinity - Allah said the Word to Mariam Be! And he (Jesus) was (that is he was created)."
That's interesting. I'm glad you shared it!
If Quran is uncreated word then why is Jesus as uncreated Word much different? Both are eternal in each of its followers' respective minds.
The other day I did a post about the Final Picture in the Art Gallery. I quoted Max Lucado urging us to tell our stories -- some people could paint, others draw or type or sculpt or whatever medium they wanted to use to tell her story. So for Muslims God "told His story" so to speak through the uncreated word of the Quran. For Christians He told it through His uncreated Word - Jesus. Words are expressions of ourselves, right? Whether we blog or write poetry or stories or thesis or whatever. So I can accept Jesus as the divine Word of God -- God's expression of Himself. I know this differs from the Muslim viewpoint that you shared, but for the sake of examples, I thought I'd throw it out there. :)
I'm enjoying all the comments.
Amber, I'm glad you chimed in on this too. I actually think I first got this from a comment YOU wrote about the Quran. It was one of those "aha" moments for me. :)
Susanne and Amber, thank you for your enlightening comments.
Amber, I know that some, maybe most, Muslims believe there is an exact physical copy of the Quran in the Heavens - the prototype - with the same verses, verse numbers, and even names of surahs. This I find troubling because at least ALL Muslims believe that the Quran was compiled by Uthman so how could he have known what names to give to the surahs and the verse numbers as well to correspond to the prototype unless he too was inspired by God?
There are modern scholars of Islam who are now dismissing the theory that the Quran is uncreated because like you pointed out, they too fear it is shirk
(http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/qur-an/-created-vs-uncreated-qur-an.html).
Susanne,
'actually think I first got this from a comment YOU wrote about the Quran. It was one of those "aha" moments for me. :)'
SURE, blame it all on me. :p That's okay. It probably was me. I am a *font* of random information some days.
Suroor,
Oohhh...thanks for the link. I'll have to go check it out later. Very interesting.
And now, I'm off to the gym. Where, in honor of Boob Quake Day, I will be wearing a short sleeve t-shirt when I lift a grown man over my head and twirl him about like a baton! ;)
Suroor,
Oh, actually, as an aside, I was once told that the myth that the Qur'an was compiled by Uthman was a horrible Shia revisionist lie. The guy who told me that was kind of a whack job, though, so I ignored him in favor of, y'know, history. :)
*Now* off to the man-as-baton fun. Ta!
Amber, how did your man-as-baton fun go? :-D
'Myth'? I never thought about that. Why would you think it is a myth? Because of the Sana manuscripts?
Apparently there is a Quran which Uthman was reading when he was slain that has his blood on it. But, I have also been warned that there are copies of "American Quran" (http://www.deenislam.co.uk/mix/fake.htm) circulating around so it means there is more than one type of Quran that exists and only who know the real one would know the difference.
Suroor,
It was a lot of fun, as always. I enjoy making the big tough guys at the gym's eyes go huge when they see me lifting the whole stack of weights (which, depending on the machine, is everwhere from 200 to 400 lbs). Go team me! :)
Sorry, when I called it a 'myth', I was quoting the guy who told me that. He said that it was a myth. Bad phrasing on my part - I forgot the quotes.
I don't personally know enough, for myself, to come down conclusively on one side or the other as to by whom and when the Qur'an was finally compiled. The Sana'a manuscripts do raise some interesting questions, but I haven't had enough time to really study the issue. :)
Suroor, "There are modern scholars of Islam who are now dismissing the theory that the Quran is uncreated because like you pointed out, they too fear it is shirk "
Ah, interesting! Thanks for pointing this out!
Amber,
LOL @ "And now, I'm off to the gym. Where, in honor of Boob Quake Day, I will be wearing a short sleeve t-shirt when I lift a grown man over my head and twirl him about like a baton! ;) "
Ha! And how did the grown man like that? I bet the folks at the gym were amused. ;)
Amber, oh nevermind, I see what you mean! Wow, 200 to 400 pounds! You are strong!! :)
Suroor, Sana manuscripts sound interesting. As does "American Quran." Hmmm.
Susanne,
Actually, when I wrote that, I was being funny. :p Though there *are* a couple of guys there I could probably bench press if they'd hold still long enough.
The 200-400 lbs really depends on the machine. Like, on the leg press, depending on the seat setting, I can do the whole stack, which is, I think 420 lbs. Other machines I can only lift 140 lbs for different exercises. It's still fun, because the guys see me, in all my 'chubby' glory, and then watch me lift more than they in their shiny muscle-y-ness can. It makes me happy. :)
Yes, that would make me happy, too! Ha! I'd love to see their faces! :)
Salaam Aleykum. More info about Quranists can be found on The Quranists Network
Suroor, I'm afraid you've mistaken 'Quranists' for 'Submitters' (followers of Rashad Khalifa). I am a Quranist and I would never impute any other type of Muslim to be a polytheist. Quranists are individuals open to other schools of thought.
Good post and Smart Blog
Thanks for your good information and i hope to subscribe and visit my blog STD Symptoms and more Scabies in Children thanks again admin
I would like to thank Usman for his efforts at kindness and civility in responding to the posts. I am trying to understand the implications of his philosophy. I assume, based on what he says, that Christians who seek to follow Jesus by living a life of love and good deeds go to heaven, after a temporary punishment for the "percentage" of their sins. I would further assume, based on Usman's logic, that he believes that this is true even for Christians who reject the Koran and who believe that Muhammad was a murderous charlatan who faked religion in order to achieve bloody political aspirations. After all, they will not be judged by what they believe, or what their religious affiliations are, but by what they do.
The author of the blog has expressed deep gratitude for God’s substitutionary atonement. Let me present two situations that demonstrate “rational” justice. The penalty for stealing is to cut off the hand of the offender. My son steals. I plead with the judge to have my own hand cut off instead of my son’s. To me, this is both rational and loving. It is what Christ does for me. In the second scenario the law is allowed to reign and my son’s hand is chopped off.
I would agree with Usman’s view that punishment for ALL of the sins that we do, and subsequent reward for all of the good deeds is “justice”. But I also believe that the actions of the father are not only rational and just, but also loving. I would certainly not like to be in the position of accusing God of lacking in love. After all, to love is good, and how can God be lacking in goodness? Where is the logic in that? In the first scenario we see a God who can grant not only forgiveness, but who can also teach discipline to the son. In the second scenario we see a God who does not forgive sin, and whose only method of encouraging righteousness is the fear of punishment. God forbid that I ever have that kind of relationship with my children. I am not so weak as to be unable to discipline them with sacrificial love, and I do not accuse God in heaven of being so weak and absent of the same sacrificial love that we so reasonably admire here on earth.
Post a Comment