As I was listening to Muslim Apologist Shabir Ally give a presentation as to why Jesus didn't actually die on the cross, I was reminded of a question that occurs every time I listen to guys like that. Why should I believe Muhammad?
Shabir Ally has stated that Muslims honor Jesus as a prophet. The problem is that Jesus didn't actually die on the cross. Instead someone made to "look like him" did. Why does he believe this kind of nonsense? Because Muhammad said so.
Here is the major question that jumps into my mind. I assume that since they recognize that Jesus is a prophet, then they would also believe that Jesus was actually a follower of Allah. They also believe that Allah is all-powerful. They believe Allah has the ability to preserve the Koran perfectly, or I assume any Word of God perfectly.
If Allah is able to do this, why am I asked to believe things about the life of Jesus from a man who was illiterate, far removed from Palestine, and 6 centuries removed in time from the events of Jesus' life over actual Gospel accounts telling us information about Jesus which were directly written by those who actually saw Him?
Well, the Gospels are corrupt I am told. So instead of Allah preserving original accounts of Jesus, he gives us testimony from some cult leader several centuries later? This is what Allah expects? This is what Muslim apologists truly want me to believe? The presuppositions are horrendous and simply not worthy of being acknowledged.
Basically, Shabir starts with the Koran. I start with God's Word. If the Koran were God's Word it would be consistent. Since the Koran can't even define the Trinity correctly, it must be wrong. Of course they think their definition of the Trinity is correct because the Koran can't be wrong. Strange to have a Muslim book tell Christians what they really believe, Historical Creeds notwithstanding.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Its strange that the Gnostics believed something very similar to the Muslims, that Jesus was replaced just prior to dieing on the cross. Obviously Muhammad says this to remove power from Jesus and give it to himself.Of course he just doesn't say Jesus is a fraud, which shows me he still had a fear of God, and would not totally renounce Jesus.
I am not sure why the Gnostics believed this? They were kind of the hippy trippy verison of Christianity, perhaps they did not want to believe God would harm Jesus. So they really missed the whole point either way.
The other thought that is always in the back of my mind is that, did God speak to Muhammad in order to create the Muslims, in order to set up for Revelations?
1) The reason I picked this example is that it is so clear, yet we see it all the time either with Gnostics or Mormons and everything else we can think of.
2) "I am not sure why the Gnostics believed this?"
I am aways surprised at how quickly people learn when I am surrounded by those who have never even heard of Gnostics. Keep up the good work in your studies.
The Gnostics are hard to pin down but the reason they deny Jesus' physical death was because they denied His physical body at all. He only appeared to be in a body.
This is a form of Platonism. Matter is inherently evil, spirit is good. Therefore Jesus could not have been of matter. It really is that simple.
How many Christians today fall for the "flesh" is evil while the spirit is good uderstanding. The idea today is based on these same false notions and a misunderstanding of the term "flesh" used by Paul in the NT.
3) God did not speak to Muhammad. He is a liar as 1 John so plainly teaches. The historical parallels between him and Joseph Smith of Mormonism is striking indeed. Simply because people use the name Jesus doesn't mean they have some honest heart that is seeking him. The historical setting of Muhammad made him completely ignorant of Scripture itself.
4) Pastor Don Fry is preaching through the Book of Revelation. I have found it to be very even handed. He explains the differing views while he is doing so. You might enjoy that. At www.PRBC.org
God Bless
Post a Comment