Religious Vent...I'm so confused and need to talk about it.

[chri'stina 190]

GEG, I have come to see you as a devout Muslim here on VJ. And I have learned about religion too, and know what Muslims believe about the bible. If someone told someone else that I will not agree with them because I believe Jesus is the only way, well that is true and obvious of my beliefs, not offensive to me.

You opened up the discussion by saying you think it's strange how Christianity became what it was and you don't see the logic. It was sort of a dig saying you can't understand the logic of it. Well, atheists reading these threads will say the same about mine and your religions together and any religion for that matter that it doesn't make sense to them.

It's easy to say the religion you don't follow is the strange one. I have never had the inclination to be a Muslim. I don't understand how Muslims can disregard the whole bible and think it's all corrupted and go by one man's words alone. But I do know how Islam was formed and while I don't agree, can see why people might be following it.

So if someone already believes one thing, like Jesus not being God as described in the bible, but rather made into God later by followers, it would show they believe the bible story was corrupted, which is a general Muslim belief. And I know you are Muslim. So I don't see how that being said was wrong at all.

So yes that is a problem in the debate if I can't use my belief system's scriptures to show what I believe if they are going to be ignored as wrongly written. That is my point. If I say the bible says this or that, it means nothing to someone who does not believe the bible. That's what I was saying to Steven. If someone already believes the bible was corrupted, how can you use biblical references to debate them? It's no use if they can't understand why you might believe what you do. If one could look at the entire bible story, you could see why Christianity came about. But to disregard the New Testament and still want an answer of how Christianity started, is going after a whole different explanation that no Christians that I know believe in.

It's not about saying "well she believes this so forget it..." It's more about, how can I defend what I believe if you are going to disregard every word I write from my belief system as wrong and the real story of Jesus was this or that. There is no more proof of Jesus being a simple Jewish man who never claimed to be God than there is that he was God, if you don't believe the bible. It's Mohammed's words against the Bible writers' words on that issue.

For every professor etc who claims one thing about Jesus, there is another who claims the opposite.

Edited June 17, 2007 by stina&suj

[JAYKE 0]

It's not about saying "well she believes this so forget it..." It's more about, how can I defend what I believe if you are going to disregard every word I write from my belief system as wrong and the real story of Jesus was this or that. There is no more proof of Jesus being a simple Jewish man who never claimed to be God than there is that he was God, if you don't believe the bible. It's Mohammed's words against the Bible writers' words on that issue.

For every professor etc who claims one thing about Jesus, there is another who claims the opposite.

This is very true, and reminds me of a situation that my son was involved in at school (he is in second grade, btw). There is a little boy in his class who likes to discuss God very often. Jake, my son, likes to discuss dinosaurs A LOT. The other little boy, Ben, would frequently tell Jake he was wrong about dinosaurs, that God made man, etc. It would frustrate my son a lot. One day, he comes home from school and I noticed his backback was LOADED. I asked him what he had, and he pulled out like three big dinosaur encyclopedias he had. I asked why he brought such big books to school, and he said "To show ben the fossil photos to show him there WERE dinosaurs". So I asked him what Ben said, and Jake said "He said those are just books". So I asked Jake what his response was. He looked at me and said "I told him so was the Bible".

I couldn't have been more proud.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

GEG, I have come to see you as a devout Muslim here on VJ. And I have learned about religion too, and know what Muslims believe about the bible. If someone told someone else that I will not agree with them because I believe Jesus is the only way, well that is true and obvious of my beliefs, not offensive to me.

You opened up the discussion by saying you think it's strange how Christianity became what it was and you don't see the logic. It was sort of a dig saying you can't understand the logic of it. Well, atheists reading these threads will say the same about mine and your religions together and any religion for that matter that it doesn't make sense to them.

It's easy to say the religion you don't follow is the strange one. I have never had the inclination to be a Muslim. I don't understand how Muslims can disregard the whole bible and think it's all corrupted and go by one man's words alone. But I do know how Islam was formed and while I don't agree, can see why people might be following it.

So if someone already believes one thing, like Jesus not being God as described in the bible, but rather made into God later by followers, it would show they believe the bible story was corrupted, which is a general Muslim belief. And I know you are Muslim. So I don't see how that being said was wrong at all.

So yes that is a problem in the debate if I can't use my belief system's scriptures to show what I believe if they are going to be ignored as wrongly written. That is my point. If I say the bible says this or that, it means nothing to someone who does not believe the bible. That's what I was saying to Steven. If someone already believes the bible was corrupted, how can you use biblical references to debate them? It's no use if they can't understand why you might believe what you do. If one could look at the entire bible story, you could see why Christianity came about. But to disregard the New Testament and still want an answer of how Christianity started, is going after a whole different explanation that no Christians that I know believe in.

It's not about saying "well she believes this so forget it..." It's more about, how can I defend what I believe if you are going to disregard every word I write from my belief system as wrong and the real story of Jesus was this or that. There is no more proof of Jesus being a simple Jewish man who never claimed to be God than there is that he was God, if you don't believe the bible. It's Mohammed's words against the Bible writers' words on that issue.

For every professor etc who claims one thing about Jesus, there is another who claims the opposite.

Since you concede that not everyone agrees about Jesus, why are we going back and forth about this? I never posed a question for anyone to answer, nor was I intending to debate. I haven't attacked Christianity; I didn't say it was strange. I do think its evolution is strange when considering its elements, how the Bible was constructed, the competing beliefs about Jesus and his purpose. No, I don't see them as someone emotionally invested, but I prefer the facts, and I do that about my own faith, as well, which is what lead me to study the Abrahamic faiths in depth and devote many years to that undertaking.

I should be able to disagree with Steven's version of logic re faith without illiciting comments pitting Islam against Christianity or Mohammed against Jesus. If you know anything about me, you also know what I am much sharper against claims that Muslims make than I am against claims that Christians make. I am not considered by any means to be a "generalist" re Islam. Having been a Muslim woman married to a Christian man blew that idea to shreds decades ago. So, attributing to me views of what Muslims "generally" believe doesn't work well with me. I'm not doctrinnaire about either Islam nor Christianity.

Like I said before, if you want to KNOW what I believe about Islam or Christianity, ask, don't assume.

Edited June 17, 2007 by Green-eyed girl

[Scott & Lai 12]

I did not intend to "dismiss" you, but was responding to your statement that Jesus was never a Christian. Christians don't claim that Jesus said he was a "Christian," they claim he said he was the "Christ." There is a significant difference between the two. You also said that it was followers of Jesus after his death who turned him into God. The fact is, people who were there at the time and who knew him claimed that their belief in his divinity came from his own words.

You also made a point about Christians going to churches instead of synagogues....I had earlier pointed out that they are essentially the same thing, just two different words for a gathering (or a gathering place) for worship.

Please do not assume because of your PHD that you know more than than those who disagree with you. There are plenty of Christians with PHDs who have a vastly different view of the origins of Christianity and of the text of the New Testament.

I'm not making any assumptions here, merely asking that none be made about me, nor that words be put into my "mouth", as has been done, including my presumed beliefs as a Muslim nor my presumed attitude toward people without Ph.Ds who disagree with me. I am speaking from a historical context, not an emotional one. I mentioned my education merely to provide context to my comments after I saw that I was being described as a Muslim whose beliefs would limit me in my understanding of Christian doctrine, not to hold myself out as an authority re the subject. So, the high-fiving around the rebuttals to my comments may feel good, but are meaningless. I am not unaware of the background of the faith, and can express myself clearly as to what I, as a Muslim, believe. I can also distinquish between what I believe as a Muslim, and the historical context of the formation of the Christian faith.

I said that Jesus was never a Christian, never went to church, came to lead people away from worldly desires. There is nothing about that to diagree with. He was made into a God by others, as his intent was to lead others to God. There is plenty of evidence that shows that among those who followed him, not all believed him to be divine himself. His words, like any others, can and have been misinterpreted to this day, so his divinity is a matter of interpretation and still is, even among those who call themselves Christian. I also said that among Christians, there are divisions due to the acceptance and rejection of certain doctrines, and Michelle's disagreement with her parents while still believing in Christianity is evidence of that. I don't believe I have said anything new nor anything that can be held in dispute if one is objective.

GEG, can you tell me what exactly you mean when you say Jesus was never a Christian? I already pointed out that there is a significant difference between Jesus claiming to be "a Christian" (which is not the Christian belief), and him claiming to be "the Christ" (which is the Christian belief). It seems we are talking past each other here, so can you tell me what it would mean for Jesus to be a "Christian"?

You also have said Jesus never went to church, and asked why, then, the Christians stopped going to the synagogue, and then went to church. I explained that there is no essential difference between the two, but apparently you don't see it that way. Can you tell me what you believe to be the distinction?

You mentioned the divisions among those who name themselves Christians over the acceptance and rejection of certain doctrines. Let me ask you this: as a Muslim, do you believe that there are any doctrines which, if rejected, would place a person outside Islam, regardless of whether they choose to call themselves Muslim?