In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
Jn10:33-36“We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
This, as anyone familiar with the way the Jews repeatedly tried provoking Jesus to commit blasphemy, was another of their attempt at discrediting his prophethood to them. In Jn8 for instance they create a situation where he would be pushed to transgress the law which he, as an Israelite prophet is supposed to uphold to the letter. But he doesnt, nor does he ever do all throughout his life. In Jn10 they tried discrediting his prophethood through the angle of polytheism, painting him as a false prophet claiming to be God. Note that these words in Jn10:33-36 are the accusers' words, not Jesus' who never said prior that he was God. He said he was one with the Father, that he was acting in His name, that he represented His authority. Jesus answered their false accustation by quoting Jewish scriptures and the usage of the term to their own forefathers as clear proof he was doing nothing wrong
"Jesus answered them "is it not written in your Law 'I have said you are gods'"?
After demonstrating their double standards, he doesnt continue his reply by justifying himself for supposedly claiming to be God. He instead continues by saying if those who received the word of God are called gods in Jewish scriptures then why consider it blasphemy if he, the one apointed by God, considers himself the SON OF GOD, not God? Son of God is a phrase used throughout their scriptures to mean a servant of God. When Jesus answers,
"Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?"
What he was trying to say was that if the Jews called
"I and my Father are one"
blasphemy then they should call what was written in their law
"Ye are gods"
blasphemy too.
Also when Jesus was before Pilate and they were bringing their accusations against him, they said he was claiming to be the Son of God Jn19:7, not God. When they mocked him on the cross, they mocked him for claiming to be the Son of God/King of Israel. Had they truly understood him to have been claiming to be God all along, they would have never missed that opportunity to mocking him for that Matt27:41-43. This further proves that they were pressing false charges of blasphemy against him, and knowingly.
The Pharisees knew their scriptures, they knew very well Jesus did nothing wrong to contradict their core teachings, never transgressed the Law. They knew very well that their charges of blasphemy were basless, meaning they were lying to dismiss his claims to prophethood because he, like past prophets sent to them whom they stoned, rejected or killed brought a message that did not fit with their desires.
Another thing worth noting is the usual ignorance of the gentile Greeks who penned the Gospels, when it comes to correctly referencing Jewish scriptures. Jesus' quote isnt from the Law/Torah as he supposedly claims, but from the
Psalms82:6"I said 'you are elohim' and all of you are children of the Most High".
Second, Elohim as is amply used in the HB, is one of God's names, but primarily means a powerful entity like for example angels or judges as in the case above and as clear from the context.
Christian apologists absurdly quote Jn10 as a proof text for the trinity. But if Jesus was truly claiming divinity, then it would totally justify his execution by stoning, according to the law of the Bible which he, allegedly in his pre-incarnate state, revealed to those very Jews attempting to kill him. It would further make those stubborn Jews anything but "children of the devil" or a "race of viper" for rejecting one who, in the trinitarian paradoxical world-view, told them not to follow a path in conflict with that of the prophets.
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
The expression of being "in" eachother can easily be understood if one looks at the context of its use throughout the NT and its application for both physical and abstract subjects.
Trinitarian proof texting has obscured the meaning of that expression, as it did in so many other cases. The plain meaning of Jesus, and any other entity being "in" another one simply is to share a common position;
In Jn14:1-9 the apostles, as is often the case, are having trouble understanding Jesus. In v7 Jesus says that to know him would be to know God since he was conveying knowledge about God. Then Phillip asks him to see God, which means as a side note that his disciples saw Jesus and God as seperate entities, to which Jesus answers
"He that has seen me has seen the Father".
God cannot be seen according to Jesus Jn1:18,5:37 so the only way that He can be known is through His signs and messengers (Jesus in this case). This reflects even in Quranic terminology where it is said that we can see God anywhere around us, through His innumerable signs 2:115. Still in Jn14:10-11 we read
"I am in the Father, and the Father in me.."
as well as throughout Jn17:21,23,26 all use the same expression of being "in" eachother for Jesus, the believers and God. Jesus asks God "just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us", he wants the believers to be "in" God and "in" himself so that they believe in his mission "so that the world may believe that you have sent me". This irrefutably proves that being "in" eachother is a figure of speech, implying a common position of truth.
In 1Jn4 the author speaks of believing in Jesus and loving one another as equivalent to being like Jesus and being in God
"No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us. This is how we know that we live in him and he in us: He has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God. And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus".
Similarily when Jesus is "in" us Col1:27, it does not make us divine or the messiah.
Same thing with Jn10:30"I and my father are one". Firstly, the verse doesnt even say "one God". That is just trinitarian wishful thinking. Also, to say that Jesus and the Father are literally one entity is a heresy by trinitarian standards because it confounds 2 distinct persons of the godhead who are supposed to be equal in authority but seperate in essence. The word "one" doesnt mean physical unity but unity of principle and agreement as it is crystal clear in Jn17 mentionned earlier, where Jesus asks God that all his followers "may be one".
The expression is used today. Even in the Quran, the messengers are "one" with God because of their common position of truth and the fact that they represent God's authority on earth 4:80"He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah".
An interesting trinitarian manipulation of the Greek figurative language of the NT is 1Cor3:8KJV where Paul says that he had planted the seed and Apollos had watered it. Then he said, "he who plants and he who waters are one". In the Greek, the wording of Paul is the same as that in Jn10:30, yet no one claims that Paul and Apollos make up "one being". The NIV translators know that this is a figure of speech in a language filled with metaphorical expressions, and so they render 1Cor3:8 as
"he who plants and he who waters have one purpose".
This further proves the non-literal meaning of the expression and the deliberate translation of the phrase as "are one" in one bible, but as "have one purpose" in another bible further exposes the trinitarian bias of bible editors.
Jesus as a prophet of God always did God’s will, not his own Lk22:42,Jn5:30,6:38; he and God have "one purpose". The Quran uses a similar wording to the prophet and others, although not in a reciprocal manner of the type
"in you and you are in him".
It says for example
2:151"We have sent feekum/in you an Apostle from among you who recites to you Our communications and purifies you and teaches you the Book and the wisdom and teaches you that which you did not know".
The verse here and in other similar ones, addresses a group, not a person, saying the prophet is inside this group. He isnt indwelling the group like some intangible spirit, he interracts with them as a teacher and they see him. The particle FEE/in also conveys the sense of "coming from them" ie from within the nation of the primary audience, as implied in 9:8.
Similarily in 5:20 Moses addresses his people "remember the favor of Allah upon you when He raised prophets feekum/in you". As in the previous example, the double implication of that word is that prophets are sent IN a group, and FROM WITHIN this group. Had the Quran used other words than FEE, such as baynakum/among/between you, the second implication "from within" would have been lost.
This choice of words is just another testimony to the Quran's surgical literary precision, and another example of a reason why the prophet's contemporaries who were masters of eloquence were baffled when they heard the Quran at first.
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
The Quran, by dismissing the notion of religious label as of any value, states that being Jew or Christian is not equivalent to being on the right path. Success in the Hereafter doesnt depend on labels
2:111"And they say: no one will enter the Garden except he who was a Jew or a Christian".
God, who knows the secrets of the hearts, answers such assertion by first dismissing it as baseless scripturally and lacking any evidence whatsoever. It then lays stress on humility, instead of boasting of one's man made labels. It finally explains, that even being Muslim isnt enough of a label
2:112"whoever submits himself entirely to Allah and he is the doer of good (to others) he has his reward from his Lord, and there is no fear for him nor shall he grieve".
The true path is therefore independent of any label, its validity being contingent on agreement with the established pattern of the prophets, as revived in the Quran, with Abraham being the prototype monotheist and unflinching, humble servant of God, the spiritual leader/imam of mankind, the hanif/upright, who never adopted polytheism 2:128-135,3:67. Ibrahim was neither a precursor of Judaism nor of Christianity, as advocated in the conflicting theological, sometimes tribal and prejudiced analysis of his life details and the implications, by these groups 3:65.
One example among many would be in regards to the implication of sacrificing his only son, which carries entirely different connotations to a Jew than to a Christian.
Muslims in turn must bear witness to being affiliated to the path of Abraham and those eminent personalities that followed him, the only path acceptable to God. In an answer to Ibrahim's prayers that in his footsteps might come a nation voluntarily submitted/muslim to the One God 2:128-132, Allah raised a prophet among his Ishmaelite descendants, who revived his spiritual path, urging his followers to be upright (hanif) in the religion 10:105,22:31, to turn away from polytheism
22:78"And strive hard in (the way of) Allah, (such) a striving as is due to Him; He has chosen you and has not laid upon you an hardship in religion; the faith of your father Ibrahim; He named you Muslims before and in this, that the Apostle may be a bearer of witness to you, and you may be bearers of witness to the people; therefore keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and hold fast by Allah; He is your Guardian; how excellent the Guardian and how excellent the Helper!".
The notion of Abrahamic religion is an Islamic one. No such concept exists in Judaism and Christianity. The Quran calls it the millah/way and din/religion of Ibrahim, consisting of reasoning to derive monotheism, faith and deeds in the way of Allah 2:130,135,3:95, 6:161,16:123,22:78.
Islam isnt a continuation of what the followers of their respective prophets later named "christianity" or "judaism". It is the continuation of the purest form of willful servitude to the one God, characterizing itself with the unadultered, timeless message it upholds, which was transmitted to mankind since Adam.
This timeless message being, as condensed in 98:5, a cognition of God's oneness and uniqueness and, implicitly, of man's responsibility to Him; a turning-away from all false concepts that compromise God's attributes, all over-estimation of oneself, and superstitions, with a great emphasis on kindness and charity towards all of God's creatures indiscriminately.
The Quran came to preserve and revive these concepts majoritarly abandoned and modified with time, as is easily seen through a cursory reading of what survived from the previous scriptures. So Just like the prophet Ibrahim was neither a Jew nor Christian, but one who willfully surrendered to Allah 3:67 his descendant the prophet Muhammad was told to follow the same original path of submission to the will of God
6:161,16:123"Then We revealed to you, [O Muhammad], to follow the religion of Abraham, inclining toward truth; and he was not of those who associate with Allah".
Judaism, or more precisely the so called Mosaic law was a system meant for the children of Israel only, and until the rise of the prophet "like unto Moses". That prophet, per the clear context of the prophecy made at Horeb, would establish a new nation under a new law code. Since coming from the "brethren" of the Israelites, he would not be bound by the law of the Israelites, and especially not in its corrupt state, including its laws meant to punish the Israelites for their sins as well as contain their propensity to sin. But the Israelites on the other hand would be bound by whatever this prophet tells them, under the threat of divine destruction, as per the prophecy in their own book, and as happened to them when they opposed the prophet Muhammad. Islam therefore is certainly in line with "the religion of the prophets". Christianity is a complete departure of this "way of the prophets". It cherry picks which parts of the so called Mosaic law to literally or metaphorically observe, and which parts to dismiss. It is a man made system meant to appeal to a gentile audience which, in the first place, wasnt even bound by the Mosaic law. And this, in total opposition to Jesus' mission and practice. Being an Israelite prophet he was bound by the law, and hence directed his message to the Israelites only to admonish them for their sins and religious hypocrisy, and bring them back to the essence of the law which they were likewise bound to observe.
For this reason, the followers of the last Ishmaelite prophet are considered closer to the path of Ibrahim than the nations that preceded them and claimed spiritual descendency from him
3:68"Indeed, the most worthy of Abraham among the people are those who followed him [in submission to Allah] and this prophet, and those who believe [in his message]. And Allah is the ally of the believers".
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
No prophet came between Ibrahim and Muhammad but that called their people to be upright/hanif in their submission to God 10:72,84,98:5.
In pre-Islamic times, the term hanif had a strict monotheistic connotation, was used in contrast to those that abhorred polytheism, but also who rejected the God incarnate of the Christians on one side and the clear monolatrous inclination of Judaism. It applied to those who exerted themselves to return to their original predisposition to uprightness as exemplified by Ibrahim. Like him, the prophets that followed him were all voluntary self-submitters, steadfastly constant on the path of servitude to God until their last breath 2:132-3,5:44,12:101,27:44 (the Queen of Sheba voluntarily submits). All belonged to the same community, under the same purpose 3:44,21:92,23:52-3, preaching monotheism 42:13.
They are not responsible for the perversion of their message by their followers, including potentially the followers of the last prophet
42:14,21:93,23:53"But they cut off their religion among themselves into sects, each part rejoicing in that which is with them".
These prophets all followed the same pattern of spiritual thought, hence the necessity for anyone to reject any proposition that clearly goes against the re-establishment of that way 3:83-5. No appellation therefore is of any importance in Islam, so long as those claiming to belong to a certain group, submit themselves in words and deeds to the divine will as expounded by a prophet of their time 2:62,5:69. These 2 verses, which speak of righteous believers of the past as is clear from the context, are Medinan. They were recited in Medina after the prophet was confronted to the rejection of some among the people of the book. The idea often propounded by orientalists as regards Islam's supposed initial conciliatory tone towards other faiths, which then changed after the prophet's conflicts with Jews and Christians is therefore baseless. Further, Sura 5 is universally recognized as among the last revealed, much later than sura 3. The contemporaries of the prophet among the people of the book are spoken of in both Medinan and Meccan suras 2:121,3:113-115,199,4:162,7:159-170,17:107-9,28:52-4 where they are either praised or condemned, irrelevant of the political tensions with Muslims, as is here the case for Christians in a late Medinan revelation
5:83"And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, "Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses".
The appellations of Jewry or Christianity came into being after the time of the Patriarchs, and long after the times of Moses or Jesus 2:140. These terms do not carry any connotation in relation to the divine will, as opposed to Muslim or Islam. They are rather labels describing an affiliation to a race or individual. The very early few ones that believed in Jesus, and their contemporaries that followed in their footsteps werent even known as Christians at first but as Nazarenes. They were strict followers of the Torah and its laws, as Jesus enjoined on his community.
Then the Quran addresses the Israelites as those who literally
62:6"became Jews"
because what Moses and the other Israelite prophets really taught was essentially Islam, or lit. volontary self-submission (to the divine will). There is a reason why the Quran exposes it as utter ignorance to claim that the patriarchs and the tribes/asbat were Jews; the Torah itself makes no mention of those people as Jews, rather as Israelites.
The root of "hadoo" includes the meaning of "those that were guided" and the Quran has attached this meaning to the Jews obviously because no other people ever received such manifest, continuous guidance. There are no Jewish prophets prior to Moses and there are no Christian prophets at all and all true prophets are Muslims in principle. So the most that can be said in this regard is that among those prophets whom the prophet Muhammad emulated, are some Jewish prophets.
Despite their clear spiritual failures and consequent divine disapproval and severe destructions, those most conceited in their spiritual and racial label were, and still are, the Jews. In the NT, Jesus and John the Baptist harshly reprimanded them for that attitude. The Quran removed their delusion as well as anyone, including followers of Muhammad, who might think God would favor them on account of ancestry or due to the righteous deeds of an ancestor 2:80,111,3:24,5:18. It challenged the Jews specifically in that regard
2:94,62:6"if you think that you are the friends of Allah to the exclusion of other people, then invoke death if you are truthful".
But as the Quran pointed, they would never do such a thing
2:96"on account of what their hands have sent before".
They know and are fully aware of their failure as a community bound by a momentous covenant with God, and thus know that should they wish for death and consequently meet with their Lord, He will take them to account collectively as per the terms of the covenant, just as He demonstrated in this very world.
When those labelling themselves Jews, Christians or any other name, persist in following corrupted spiritual notions alien to that pattern of the prophets, despite receiving proper explanations of their errors and those of their predecessors, they are termed followers of "nothing good". They arent even upholding their own scriptures in sincerity
5:68"Say: O followers of the Book! you follow no good till you keep up the Torah and the Injeel and that which is revealed to you from your Lord".
The Torah and Injeel attest to
"that which is revealed to you from your Lord"
ie the Quran. To reject the Quran, a revelation interconnected with the previous ones and coming from the same Source 6:91,26:196,29:46, which in addition guards, protects, revives the pattern of the prophets, therefore means to deny their own scriptures that attest to its veracity, more particularly of the one that carried and propagated it
6:20"Those whom We have given the Book recognize him as they recognize their sons; (as for) those who have lost their souls, they will not believe".
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
Those on the other hand who recognized the Quran upon hearing it as attesting to the truth of their scriptures and the pattern of the prophets are the
3:113-115"upright party; they recite Allah's communications in the nighttime and they adore (Him). They believe in Allah and the last day, and they enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and they strive with one another in hastening to good deeds, and those are among the good. And whatever good they do, they shall not be denied it, and Allah knows those who guard (against evil)".
They were greatly devoted to their own scriptures prior to the coming of Islam. They sincerely followed the truth therein, without bias, instead of the conjectures of their corrupt leadership, nor their personal low desires in exchange of worldly benefits. It is only natural then that when they
5:83"hear what has been revealed to the messenger you will see their eyes overflowing with tears on account of the truth that they recognize; they say: Our Lord! we believe, so write us down with the witnesses (of truth)"."
They
3:199"believe in Allah and (in) that which has been revealed to you and (in) that which has been revealed to them, humbling themselves before Allah; they do not sell the signs of Allah for a small price; these it is that have their reward with their Lord".
This verse 3:199 stresses the obligation in believing in the Quran for them to be believers in their own scriptures, as it confirms the prophecies in their books and restores the truth. This does not need happening overnight and they might seek further information, study and knowledge to further confirm the initial gut instinct that made them recognize the truth of the Quran.
They are mainly the learned men among the Israelites 26:197,29:47 firm in knowledge as well as those among the common masses who adhere to their scriptures with sincerity and the best of their ability 4:162. They are those who overcame the stiff-neckedness and arrogance of their people, effortlessly and naturally recognizing the truth 46:10. Same is the case with the learned and austere and sincere believers among the Christians 5:82-4, and who will consequently be rewarded appropriately 28:52-4.
The Quran says that
3:110,28:52"those whom We gave the Book before it, they are believers in it".
It is a testimony to the conversions of Jews and Christians in Muhammad's lifetime and as a prophecy witnessed today. The image of God literally giving them the Book is a praise of their merit, a metonym for them having been granted wisdom and knowledge, because of their willingness and openness for guidance. To this effect the Quran quotes them testifying to their entire submission to their revealed scriptures, even before the revelation of the Quran
28:53"surely we were submitters (lit. Muslims) before this".
As stated above, the principle of being a "Muslim", voluntarily subservient to the divine will, is a feature of the rightly guided prior to the term becoming the sole prerogative of Muhammad's followers. These are the ones to be sought for confirmation of the Quran's veracity, among the followers of previous scriptures 10:94. There is a reason why it calls them
"those that read the book",
in contrast to others among them, pictured as donkeys that carry a load while totally unaware of its contents 62:5. The verse 10:94 is not telling Muslims to seek further knowledge about some supposed incomplete information in the Quran. It speaks of doubt as regards the Quranic statements being true. The Quran repeatedly points to all scriptures of the prophets coming from the same original source, and having the same common thread of truth running throughout them. If anyone is in doubt as regards the statements of the Quran being true, then he may seek corroborating information in the previous scriptures
"But if you are in doubt as to what we have revealed to you, ask those who read the Book before you; certainly the truth has come to you from your Lord, therefore you should not be of the disputers".
The context is directly linked to information concerning the Israelites and their Egyptian bondage, as in 17:101. Similarly in 16:43,21:7 it tells the prophet's opponents to go and seek confirmation among the "people of the reminder", as regards the veracity that messengers were always sent as humans. Here again, as it does in 10:94 and elsewhere, the Quran uses a powerful image to depict the sincere and learned ones among the followers of previous scriptures, who should be sought for confirmation of a Quranic statement. They are those who have safeguarded whatever remains of truth of their scriptures and tradition, remembering it firmly and passing it on truthfully, in contrast to those among them who threw their scriptures behind their backs as if they were unaware of their contents 2:101.
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
2:111"And they say: no one will enter the Garden except he who was a Jew or a Christian. These are their vain desires. Say; bring your proof if you are truthful".
A long time ago, God challenged that empty statement by the people of the book, telling them to bring the proof of that statement. And they never will.
In fact, Judaism today sees in Islam the manifestation of God's promised blessings of Ishmael, admits that Islam is the only religion along with Noachidsm (the system revealed to, and taught by Noah, as alluded to in the Quran 42:13) that can earn non-Jews success in the hereafter. They see in both of these "gentile religions" a complete compatibility with the universal spiritual principles revealed prior to Moses and the mosaic law (which is exclusively binding on Jews).
Trinitarian Christianity on the other hand is a different issue. Islam doesnt need Judaism to be justified but it is interesting to see how the closest people to Christianity, reading the same books, those who should a priori understand and accept the Christian proposition, in regards to their doctrines are actually further from them than from Islam which they see as a legitimate gentile religion
2:113"And the Jews say: The Christians do not follow anything (good) and the Christians say: The Jews do not follow anything (good) while they recite the (same) Book. Even thus say those who have no knowledge, like to what they say; so Allah shall judge between them on the day of resurrection in what they differ".
The truth of Islam is independent of whether Jews, Christians or Buddhists recognize it. It stands firm and strong because of its own internal arguments while the aforementioned groups crumble in the light of their own internal evidence, let alone common sense.
Christians are often the ones trying to disparage Islam by painting it as seemingly in disconnect with the Judeo-Christian system. This argument, as shown earlier is built on false assumptions; that Islam claims to be in continuity with these 2 religions, and that Christianity itself is a continuation of Judaism. Ironically and as the Quran alludes to, Judaism, which is supposed to be the precursor of Christianity, actually argues, based on the same books of the Christians, that the latter is a sinful way while Islam is in congruence with the pre-mosaic system. This is a quiet devastating observation to those trying to use that sort of analogy of continuity against Muslims.
Let us see the common sense of the Quran and how it devastates the weak charge of this youtuber.
The Quran uses the term Muslims to all those that voluntarily submit to the divine will, whether that will manifested through Abraham, Moses, Jesus or Muhammad. Submission to the Divine Will, willingly or not, is according to the Quran, an observable reality in the universe down to our inner selves, since the origin of things 3:83-5,13:15,19:88-95,22:18 until all are commanded and made to disintegrate and resurrect 84:2. The Divine Will governing the spiritual realm follows the same pattern, with a nuance regarding a specific entity, the humans. Their spiritual submission will not be done willingly or not, as in the case with the rest of the created universe. It must be a willful process, hence the Quranic statement that the only din/way acceptable to Allah, is Islam.
That word literally translates into the voluntary self-submission 3:19,2:127-130 because it is the natural fabric of the universe. Those who choose not to surrender totally to God or humbly and freely comply with His order of life, appear out of place in this design.
Those who choose not to surrender totally to God or humbly and freely comply with His order of life, appear out of place in this design
3:83"Do they seek a religion other than God’s, when every soul in the heavens and the earth has submitted to Him, willingly or by compulsion, and to Him they shall all return?"
Islam and its derivatives (muslim, aslama) are used throughout the Quran to denote one's adoption of the divine will with his heart and soul, symbolized by "the face" in classical Arabic
2:112"whoever submits his face (aslama wajhahu) to Allah and he is the doer of good (to others)..".
To further corroborate, those claiming to adhere to the Quran are told to further
2:208"enter into the silm/the volontary self-surrender".
Being a "Muslim" is thus on a higher level that mere acceptance of the Quran and Islam, it transcends the simple label as understood nowadays. What it really entails is subordinating all aspects of one's life to the divine will. With the revelation of the Quran none may be labelled Muslim except those who adhere to it in faith and deeds. This isnt because of following the Quran per se, but because it is the final manifestation of the divine will. Prior to it, every individual that followed the latest manifestation of the divine will through a prophet of the time, could equally be labelled Muslim.
With the Quran, the path to voluntary self-servitude to the divine will has been defined is such a clear way, that no compulsion is necessary for it to be adopted by a reasonable person 2:256,18:29. Through it, the divine will as manifested with such a climax that it will inevitably lead, as it has been doing since it came to the world and will continue doing, to the entering of people into its fold like waves upon waves 110:1-3.
Any other appellation that carries a connotation other than the one conveyed through "Muslim" and "Islam" is nothing but a distortion of this simple originality taught from Adam to Muhammad. When concluding in sura anbiya the stories of some of the most eminent prophets and pious personalities, the passage ends with a statement that these people that preceded, including the newly established nation of the last prophet are in fact a single nation with the same ultimate aims, despite the apparent disconnect between those that claim spiritual affiliation to them 21:92-3.
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
Besides failing on a historical level for lack of external evidence, the crucifixion story as depicted in the Greek Christian writings fails on an internal, theological level. According to habakkuk1, the everlasting God "will never die". The Quran equally states
25:58"And rely upon the Ever-Living who does not die, and exalt [Allah] with His praise".
Humans have a dual nature, the body and the spirit. Lets call that human being John. John has thus a human body and a spiritual essence. John gets nailed on a cross and dies. His body expires while his spirit transitions to the hereafter. To say that John did not die on the cross because his spiritual essence survived would be false. Similarily God, according to the trinity doctrine has both a human body and a spiritual essence. God gets nailed on a cross and dies. His human nature expires while his spiritual essence transitions. To say that God did not die because his spiritual essence survived would then be as false as in John's case.
Yet even from a materialistic standpoint, death is the end of life. In religion, death ends life in the present world and begins life in the hereafter. How does the ever-living, eternal God cease living in anyway shape or form? Assuming God did not die when he was crucified. This would then undermine the notion of atoning sacrifice. Death and loss is what validates the atonement. If God did not die, losing nothing in the process, then what did He sacrifice on the cross? Habakkuk1 is a general statement. It excludes death in any way. It doesnt say God's spirit cannot die while his body can. This is an example of what an explicit statement, closed to any misinterpretations, is. It is what is referred to in religious terminology, a firm verse, or as the Quran says, muhkam. A religion based on solid explicit tenets, does not seek ambiguous verses and try to derive isolated meanings upon which to build an entire belief system. Whenever confronted to ambiguous verses, that are open to several contradicting interpretations, we consider the context, the words used and cross reference them with other similar verses. More importantly, whatever the conclusion we come up with, the interpretation may never contradict the explicit, firm, decisive verses. But that is not how Pauline christianity works. In order to circumvent the statement that God "will never die" and make it fit the belief of divine sacrifice, it is said that this sacrificing Christian god didnt really die. Assuming God did not die when he was crucified. This would then undermine the notion of atoning sacrifice. Death and loss is what validates the atonement. If God did not die, losing nothing in the process, then what did He sacrifice on the cross?
Further, why would God go as far as killing his son (or self) to prove his trustworthiness and capacity to truly forgive, and how is it a proof of love? Only an unjust, deluded criminal, unworthy to be the judge of mankind would think that murder is a proof of love. Why would anyone trust an entity, divine or else, willing to commit suicide (or even worse, kill its own progeny) to prove its love? One would instead try helping such entity out of its delusion. One would not want in anyway to be associated with such demonstration of "passionate love".
God, since times immemorial has been demonstrating His love through the prophets, sending promises of mercy and forgiveness before that mythological Greek drama was invented. Believers have always known and trusted this fact attested in scriptures over and over again, which God made contingent on repentance and obedience to His commandements. Nobody thought God would fail His promise, or was incapable of forgiving the servants that wholeheartedly turn to Him. The Quran treats such hopelessness in God as a mark of disbelief
39:53-4"Say, "O My servants who have transgressed against themselves [by sinning], do not despair of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins. Indeed, it is He who is the Forgiving, the Merciful. And return [in repentance] to your Lord and submit to Him before the punishment comes upon you; then you will not be helped" 15:56"And who despairs of the mercy of his Lord except for those astray?".
That attribute of mercy is in fact the only one described in the Quran as "written upon" God 6:12,54. Christians on the other hand do not expect God to be merciful, to the point they need him to prove his capacity to forgive by murdering his own self/son. Furthermore, a judge that forgives someone because of the actions of another, Jesus' sacrifice in this case, isnt a merciful judge. Forgiveness wasnt triggered by the mercy of the judge, rather by the price paid by another. So although Christians do believe in their God's absolute mercy, in reality their concept of the divine is far removed from it. The profound difference in relation to that theological aspect between Islam and Christianity goes back to the story of the garden. While in the Quran, the story ends with hope and forgiveness, in Christianity it is misconstrued in a way the Jews who read the same scriptures before them, vehemently dispute.
In the Quran Adam is sent away from the garden with the message that whenever guidance is recognized and acted upon, then mankind "shall not go astray nor be unhappy". There is therefore in the Quranic account of creation no place for unconditional, senseless and indiscriminate condemnation. On the contrary, the incident is concluded with forgiveness and spiritual guidance. The Christian belief on the other hand is that there was no forgiveness, sin became ingrained in human nature and transmitted to Adam's progeny. On top of that, God, instead of sending the solution to that "problem" in the shape of Christ's atoning death, establishes a long line of prophethood and laws to be followed. This divinely decreed deceptive crooked system was bound to fail in the face of human depravity, for several thousands of years, until the issue of salvation was finally resolved with the crucifixion. This theology appeals to people who have despaired of life, themselves and God. It is toxic, as it crushes the person's self esteem, making him yield to dark thoughts of hopelessness in oneself, and it is satanic as it discourages the building of a relationship with a merciless, unloving God. Hope is therefore found elsewhere, neither in God nor man, but in an intercessor that fixes the defects of both so as to reconcile them. He is a sinless man and a merciful, loving God, both in one since the divine cancels sinfulness and the human cancels mercilessness and unlovingness. His divine nature makes this man capable of perfect deeds thus pleasing God and restoring His (God's) hope in man, while his human nature makes this God capable of dying, and through this self-sacrifice, capable of showing love and mercy, thus pleasing man and restoring his hope in God.
That is why the Quran quotes Jesus himself, emphatically denying the man-made, unscriptural notion of sin atonement as understood by those that deified him
5:72"and the messiah said; ...serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Surely whoever associates with Him, then Allah has forbidden to him the garden, and his abode is the Fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust".
In this short statement, Jesus nullifies everything Trinitarian Christianity stands for, the idea of a divine entity other than God being the means by which one's eternal felicity and freedom from sins depends. In another place, Jesus, instead of taking upon himself the sins of mankind, denies even the sins of his own followers that began deifying him. He washes his hands from their deviations and submits to God's justice, leaving the entire prerogative of salvation in God's hands
5:116-118"If You should chastise them, then surely they are Your servants; and if You Should forgive them, then surely You are the Mighty, the Wise".
In the monotheistic faith, the prominence of God's attribute of mercy does not mean it comes freely. It is earned, through concrete, repeated, steadfast actions proving one's sincere penitent resolve. This however is only beneficial in relation to God's rights. But if a sin includes infringing on other people's rights then the divine law has declared it an injustice to deprive a victim of its due rights. In that case it is upon the victim to either benevolently forgive and turn away, or demand restitution for the harm done. No human sacrifice was needed before Jesus for people to known and trust in those things which the prophets said. It is ironic that in the book of Isaiah, the one most appealed to and distorted to prove the abhorrent notion of human sacrifice as the only prerequisite for sin atonement, God says
Isa55"my ways are different from yours".
This comes right after the reassuring statement that God is near and hearer of prayers so
"Let the wicked leave their way of life and change their way of thinking. Let them turn to the LORD, our God; He is merciful and quick to forgive".
God's nature is contrary to human's who need and ask their debt to be settled in case of foul play. There are no debts between men and God, He doesnt lose anything from people transgressing His commands neither does He gain from their worship. His glory remains unchanged in both cases. That is why he does not need to be propitiated. For His mercy to be released, the sinner does not need to act in relation to God but to his own self, through repentance and mending of ways. This deed is one that has no effect on God but on the sinner, cleansing his own soul. It is as a result of the person taking action to cleanse his self, that God releases His mercy, blotting out the sin completely and forgives Isa43. This is the main, among many other avenues for forgiveness which the HB gives besides blood atonement. The concept of atoning sacrifice is nowhere to be found in Jesus' words anyway. He nowhere speaks of his own death as an atonement for sin. He is instead depicted as talking of his life as being a ransom Mk10:45, but in a clear context of dedication and humility. He is dedicating his life for the sake of others, like all selfless people should. It is Paul who connected these words with expiation for sins in 1Tim2. This spin caused intense debates and disagreements throughout the ages among all branches of Christianity; ranging from the notion of Jesus' life being the ransom paid back to Satan who held humanity in hostage, to the idea that God the Father was the one to receive the payment, and many other nuances in between. The inherent problems to every proposition, the contradictions each of them create with various Christian doctrines such as God literally ransoming himself to himself, is what led the Roman Catholic Church to describe the ransom theory as a "mystery of universal redemption".
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
Jesus feared death and tried to avoid it Jn7:1,11:54,Luke 22:42. He begged God 3 times, putting his forehead to the ground, to take his soul before experiencing suffering and death in Matt26:38. He does not want to experience what he was about to go through but nevertheless submits his will to that of the father, whether he decides to make him bear the cup of suffering or not "Yet not My will, but Yours be done".
Clearly, had he been given the choice, he would have refused "dying for the sins of mankind" despite having supposed foreknowledge of the divine plan of salvation since the beginning of creation, a plan which he himself sketched together with his divine partners. It also shows one of the so called co-equal partners submitting his will to another. Yet we never see the reverse, with the Father obediently submitting his will to the Son or the Holyspirit. That "hesitation" from Jesus cannot be attributed to his human nature as he himself states that it is his soul that feared and doubted Matt26:38.
If that werent enough, when on the cross he grieves for God's abandoning him, or himself abondonning his own self. Even Revelations5 which is sometimes quoted to defend the notion of a predetermined divine masterplan of salvation through Jesus, is in fact speaking in eschatological terms, just as the whole book does. It speaks of the salvation of some people after events of great tribulation, ie the end of times. Then we have Heb5:7 throwing in the ambiguous statement that Jesus' prayers were heard and accepted by God, and this includes the desperate cry to
"let this cup pass from"
him. The realization of his prayer, his inability to take on the full brunt of the "sins of mankind" came in the form of Simon of Cyrene who relieved Jesus from his cross and carried it half way till Golgotha Matt27:31-33.
This embarrassing change to the divine master plan of salvation forced another author in Jn19:17-18 to have Jesus carrying his own cross, the symbol of mankind's sins, all the way until he reached Golgotha where he was crucified.
The predictions Jesus makes as regards his impending death, similarily reveal the clumsiness of the Greek scribes trying to retrospectively enforce their theological agenda anyway they could, just as they did with their inapropriate linking of HB passages to Jesus. When Jesus supposedly tells his disciples, several times and in the most explicit of ways, how he would die, they are taken by complete surprise when the events allegedly unfold. Not once are they depicted, following his supposed death, as patiently waiting his predicted resurrection after just 3 days. Neither are they depicted recalling the secret miracle once it unfolds. These writers werent even able to maintain a consistent story line from chapter to chapter, why would anyone take any of their reports at face value? As a side note the cross was not a Christian symbol until the 6th century. Could the whole "Simon of Cyrene" tale be orthodoxy's early response to a story popularised by certain gnostics that it was not Jesus but Simon who had been nailed to the cross? We will leave that to Christians to ponder upon.
The "via dolorosa" as a side note, does not pass anywhere near this path, but follows the line of the town built on the ruins of old Jerusalem by the Roman Emperor Hadrian after 135, long after Jesus. The later embellishments along that route such as Jesus' encounters with Mary or Veronica or his falling three times, are also alien to even the Gospel accounts. The original holy walk had no "devotional halts" and went from the Mount of Olives southwest via Mount Sion before entering the city. But by the Middle Ages Christendom was divided by schisms, triggered less by theological and doctrinal subtleties than by power struggles and rivalry for converts in central Europe and the Balkans. The rancour and hostility between the Roman and Greek churches led each to scramble for the more impressive array of icons, relics and sanctuaries. In Jerusalem, opposing Christian groups established rival routes to Calvary (Latin for Golgotha), each route acquiring sacred stops along the way to add to their appeal and holiness. The Latins were even divided among themselves. An informed Christian would doubtless argue that the Via Dolorosa and its way stations are no longer understood as historically accurate, that they are symbolic.
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
God is the utlimate and exclusive guide, because all direct and indirect means by which one is spiritually purified and elevated come from Him ultimately. He clarifies the right from the wrong, after which each one is free to make a conscious choice
2:38,16:9,92:12-13"Surely on Us is the guidance"
9:122,2:187,6:154"..so that they should believe in the meeting of their Lord".
The first sura, sura fatiha teaches mankind in the form of a supplication that we should seek help exclusively from Allah
1:5"You alone (iyyaka) we ask for help"
in order that He guides us to the one and only path that leads to Him, the same path the Prophets and Messengers of Allah throughout history have called human beings to follow called Al-Sirat Al-Mustaqim
1:6"Keep us on the right path".
It is a path that Allah has Himself appointed for His servants and the only one leading to success
30:60"Did I not enjoin on you, 0 children of Adam! that you should not worship the Satan..And that you should worship Me; this is the straight path".
Worshiping God is the shortest path
2:186"..I am near; I answer the prayer of the suppliant when he calls on Me, so they should answer My call and believe in Me, that they may walk in the right way".
Other ways also lead to God
5:15-6"Indeed, there has come to you a light and a clear Book from Allah; with it Allah guides him who follows His pleasure into the ways of safety and brings them out of utter darkness into light by His permission and guides them to the straight path".
God guides those in search for the truth to these many ways 29:69 that all lead to one and same straight path.
Trinitarianism can be deemed one of those ways, to an individual coming from outright polytheism for example, and with no other available religious system than it to adhere to. But through it, and despite its obvious deficiencies, one may come closer and closer to a purer form of monotheism until he is naturally led to the straight path of Islam. The Quran has alluded to these deficient ways
12:106"And most of them do not believe in Allah without associating others (with Him)"
this verse along with 13:16,29:61 is indiscriminate, it addresses both Muslims and non-Muslims who claim to believe in One God while associating with Him in His supreme authority, consciously or unconsciously, their religious authorities, saints, personalities and even their own selves. Linguistically, mustaqim stems from q-y-m whose primary meaning is standing upright. siratul mustaqim is thus a vertical, upright path, taking the human away from the world, carrying him to heaven.
Some however have strayed far from any tiniest rivulet leading to the torrent, willfuly rejecting all guidance. Sura fatiha teaches the supplicant to only seek God's guidance to the straight path, so that he is preserved from straying far to these crooked, forsaken ways leading to destruction
1:6-7"Keep us on the right path, The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors. Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray".
This straight path is a favor from Allah to His creation and brings about blessings and felicity to its sincere followers
4:69"They will be in the company of those whom Allah has blessed from among the Prophets, the truthful, the martyrs, and the righteous".
God's guidance is thus contingent on freewill, it can never be forced on anyone. It is only natural then that each person is allowed to alk the path it willfully chooses. Those who want to be guided will be shown guidance and those that arent interested in being guided, then God will utlimately withdraw the guidance from them
5:41"Those are they for whom Allah does not desire that He should purify their hearts".
The Quran illustrates this through the people's reaction to its parables. It shows how one and same cause produces two opposite reactions. The right response is the acceptance of the guidance, the reaction of the muttaqin 2:2. The wrong response is the "going astray" by adding more threads to the already existing web of doubts, the reaction of the fasiqin 2:26.
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
Whether in the Quran or that youtuber's HB, divine guidance doesnt come automatically and for free. It is earned.
The same is stated by Jesus in his sermon Matt5 where he describes the bestowal of God's spiritual blessings as being contingent on righteousness and spiritual awareness. He says the same in the bags of gold parable where a master favors his servants with wealth proportionate to their abilities, like God favors his servants whom he graces with guidance depending on their degree of spiritual awareness. The more God-conscious in their faith and behavior, the more they are granted spiritual insight. The spiritually blind get nothing and are kept away from guidance as often stated by Jesus Mk4:10-12,Matt7:6,13:13-15.
Man has to first choose by himself the basic guidance that has been made available to all human beings, as pledged to Adam, in various forms such as revelations or scriptures
4:174"O People, surely there has come to you manifest proof from your Lord and We have sent to you clear light".
This verse manifests the supplicant's prayer in sura fatiha, where he asks God for guidance towards the right way. After having been exposed to this indiscriminate divine guidance, one is free to accept it as there is no coercion in religion 2:256,18:29. The finding of the right direction therefore originates first through man's own choice and inner struggle
47:17,91:7-8,13:11"surely Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change their own condition".
Once that basic, indiscriminate guidance is accepted, God further increases in guidance those that seek Him
3:101,4:175"Then as for those who believe in Allah and hold fast by Him, He will cause them to enter into His mercy and grace and guide them to Himself on a right path".
This is Allah's internal guidance. It is contingent on man's initial willingness to be guided, which is reflected in deeds and attitude. Countless verses reflect that notion including 2:213,4:69,5:16, 6:117,10:9,12:22,19:76,28:56,29:69,31:4-5,42:13,53:30,58:22,64:11,68:7 and many more verses where Allah declares that He best knows who are the followers of the right way and strive therein from those who choose to go astray, those who incline to truth, who obey and believe in Him, the doers of good, worship Him with certainty of heart, those who turn to Him and those who give priority to true faith above any other principle that may contradict it. These are the people that He guides, impresses faith on their hearts, bestows on them wisdom and knowledge 28:14 (as similarily stated by Solomon in Prov2:7), His mercy and grace 4:70,175. These are the ones whose breasts are expanded so as to give them inner certainty and create a favorable receptacle for guidance 6:125,18:13,39:22-23.
The most eminent of prophets such as Moses and Muhammad similarily had their chest expanded as they set themselves to face the tyrants of their times 20:25,94:1. The servants of God are further tranquilized, healed, and strengthened in their hearts 10:57,48:4. Just as the believing youths who had fled their land on account of the religious persecution and hid in a cave were increased and established in guidance 18:13-4. Solomon in the HB stated concerning God's guidance
Prov3:8"it shall be healing for your navel and marrow for your bones".
Long before, as Solomon was placed on the throne and shouldered with the responsibility of building the Temple, David his father admonished the nation through him, reminding him of that notion of conditional divine guidance
1Chr28:9"And you, my son Solomon, know the God of your father and worship Him with a whole heart and with an eager soul, for the Lord seeks all hearts, and He understands the thoughts of every creation; if you seek Him, He will be found to you, and if you forsake Him, He will abandon you forever".
God's communications become self-evident to the rightly guided 29:49, making their "steps firm" 14:27,47:7 during their ascent to moral heights. Although this ascent may seem like an uphill climb, it ultimately leads to a pure, happy and fulfilled life for the God-conscious, whether in this world or the next 16:97,90:11-18,92:7. Those that reject Resurrection and the Hereafter on the other hand live in mental torture as regards the higher meanings of all occurences in this life 34:7-8.
Contrary to those whose hearts are at peace and who walk firmly the path of this world, evil entities make the disbelievers' step "slippery" 3:155, an imagery employed in previous scriptures Jer23:12,Ps35:6 and sometimes attributed to God Ps73:18.
This is because the righteous' way is enlightened while the one of the wicked is dark and crooked regardless of his perception of it, as here stated by Solomon
Prov5:18-19"But the way of the righteous is like the light of dawn; it shines ever brighter until the day is perfect. The way of the wicked is like pitch darkness; they do not know on what they stumble".
An eloquent liguistic device used in the Quran to contrast guidance with the lack of it, is the mentionning of aala/upon with guidance, picturing the guided ones riding a calm entity or standing on an elevated place from where they have a clear view, while fi/in is mentionned with the state of error, picturing the misguided ones engulfed in the darkness of delusion and unable to perceive their surroundings correctly 34:24.
The notion of God guiding the righteous who walk in His way, making their steps firm by leveling and smoothing their path is expressed in the Hebrew Bible Isa26:7,Ps4:8,18:33,27:11,143:8,Jer31:8. David supplicated God for that
Ps5:9"O Lord, lead me in Your righteousness; because of those who lie in wait for me, make Your way straight before me".
The effect was that God Ps18:37"enlarged my step[s] beneath me, and my ankles have not slipped". Solomon depicted the one who attains spiritual and moral heights
Prov3:23"Then you shall go securely on your way, and your foot shall not stumble".
The prophet Habakkuk said concerning the uplifting nature of divine guidance
Hab3:19"The Sovereign Lord is my strength, He makes me as surefooted as a deer, able to tread upon the heights".
The rightly guided ones are given a clear discernement of right and wrong during that process
6:122,7:201,47:17,57:28"and make for you a light with which you will walk".
It is God-consciousness that prevents man from being misled into the path of the spiritually unaware. Elsewhere the Quran is very appropriately referred to as al-Furqan/the Criterion, precisely for its endowing the believer with the correct insight to discriminate between right and wrong
25:1,45:20"This (Quran) is visions for the people and guidance and mercy for a people who are certain"
and answer the call of
8:24"that which gives you life; and know that Allah intervenes between man and his heart".
In a hadith, the prophet Muhammad quotes Allah
"My servant continues to draw closer to Me with voluntary acts of worship until he becomes beloved to Me. And when I love him, I become the hearing with which he hears, and the seeing with which he sees".
It is interesting to note that in the hereafter, this spiritual light will become physical light. Only those who possessed it in this life will be able to use it to find their way in the hereafter.
That sharpness of spiritual insight endowed upon those God deems fit is such that faith and righteousness become the dearest of values while unbelief and transgression become hated 49:7-8.
The prophet Ibrahim, having received a clear discernment of right and wrong even felt physically sick at the sight of falsehood 37:89. The prophet Yusuf, because of that faculty was able to extricate himself from a situation that would have otherwise compromised his chastity 12:22-4. Love of Truth and aversion towards everything false and sinful is the natural outcome of the acceptance of the straight path. One becomes in a heightened state of spiritual awareness, constantly longing to be increased in divine knowledge and wisdom. IT is however important to keep in view that the Quran here is not speaking of hatred towards the sinful person itself.
There are countless verses encouraging rectitude and compassion indiscriminately even towards one's enemies, and regardless of the person's religion or lack thereof. Religious hatred is hatred for evil and evil deeds.
This again, demonstrates the supreme pragmatism of the Quran; infatuated love and destructive hatred completely miss the mark. One hates for the sake of God and loves for the sake of God. One hates the evil deed because it harms the sinner, just as one loves the good deed because it brings one closer to guidance. The prophet encapsulated that notion when he spoke of a category of people whom the prophets and martyrs themselves will envy on the day of resurrection
"The best faith is to love for the sake of Allah, to hate for the sake of Allah, and to work your tongue in the remembrance of Allah. Mu’adh said, “What is it, O Messenger of Allah?” The Prophet said: That you love for the people what you love for yourself, and you hate for the people what you hate for yourself, and that you speak goodness or remain silent".
The HB surely echoes the theme of religious hatred although it amalgamates hatred towards the individual itself as reflected in David's
Psalms119:104-5,139:21-22"From Your precepts I shall gain understanding; therefore, I hate all ways of falsehood. Your words are a lamp for my foot, and light for my path...Did I not hate Your enemies, O Lord? With those who rise up against You, I quarrel. I hate them with utmost hatred; they have become my enemies".
Solomon reflected that notion too Proverbs2:7-10,13:5. Again in 2Sam22, the prophet David speaks of God's guidance as the lamp by which one walks in darkness, levelling the obstacles along the path, making every step firm, a rock, forteress and shield of salvation. In his later days, he would state
Ps19:9"the commandment of the Lord is clear, enlightening the eyes".
It is obedience to God's commandements, meaning initial action and proof of submission to the divine will, that then causes one's inner self to be lit up. And just as transgression is hated by the upright, to turn away from it is just as hated by the spiritually dead Prov13:19.
The Quran, which repeatedly says it is a guidance for mankind, also says that its guidance is conditional on the internal disposition of the one who approaches it. That internal disposition is nurtured through deep reflection on the physical signs in the heavens and the earth, leading one to acknowledgement the unseen realities, such as a higher purpose of existence, the existence of a Creator and the inevitable return to Him. Finally one has to display sincerity in his thoughts and deeds, which characterizes itself through the person's readiness to put the revealed teachings into practice 2:1-4,45:1-6.
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
Christian eschatology reveals the anti semitism of its gentile Greek writers to the fullest.
Towards the end of days, 2/3 of Israel will be destroyed and damned for rejecting the man/god of the trinity. Their Armageddon theology is detailed in the book of Revelation -a Book not even considered God inspired until very late in Church history-. Those damned Jews, the Jews of the "flesh", labelled as such because of lacking spirituality and rejecting Jesus Rom2:28-9, those sons of Satan Jn8:44, worshipping in their satanic synagogues Rev2:9 will be made to bow down at the feet of the true Jews, meaning the Christians Rev3:9. This way Jesus’ beloved church is vindicated. After that humiliation they will be sent for eternal damnation.
It is these kinds of satanic association that helped produce a portrait for faithful Christians throughout the centuries of the “evil” Jew representing satan on earth. By persecuting those satanic Jews, the church and its faithful followers were in a way hastening the day when Jesus would fulfill his promise to “make them [the synagogue of Satan] come and bow down at your feet”.
What is ironic is that the contrary is depicted in the HB, with the non-Jews, including Christians, coming at the Jews' feet. Although the messianic prophecies in the HB agree that there will be mass slaughter of those that do not believe in the Jewish God, this war shall occur prior to the messiah's arrival and universal recognition Isa59:19-20. None will be required to "believe" in the Jewish messiah because his universal rule will be an undeniable fact. An utopic era will be ushered, where only one truth reigns supreme, that of the Hebrew Bible.
Every other belief system will be abolished and erased, its people destroyed, by natural calamity or others means like God's jealous and furious fire of destruction. God is often likened in the HB as a smith selecting through fire the trash from the precious metal, concretely resulting in "purifying" the people's hearts and lips. Once purified, all those surviving non-Jews will prostrate to the One true God
Zeph3:8-9,Zech14:9-17"And the Lord shall become King over all the earth; on that day shall the Lord be one, and His name one".
Some modern apologists have attempted to negate that idea of universal forceful conversion using Micah4:5. It is ironic that this same verse is used in rabbinic comentaries to prove the opposite. The context itself speaks of the streaming of nations into Jerusalem to learn Judaism, God's judgement of nations afar, in a time where
"all peoples shall go, each one in the name of his god, but we will go in the name of the Lord, our God, forever and ever".
The non-Jews "going" to their false gods implies "going for destruction" in contrast to the Jews who will go on "forever". This will usher a time not only of religious monopoly but of forcible, physical subjugation of all non-Jewish peoples, made to crawl like abject creatures to the Jews' feet, in fear of
Micah7:17"our God",
transfering in addition all their riches to their new masters
Isa66:12"like a flooding stream",
or be destroyed
Zech14,Isa45:22"Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is no other"
Isa49:23"And kings shall be your nursing fathers and their princesses your wet nurses; they shall prostrate themselves to you with their face on the ground, and they shall lick the dust of your feet, and you shall know that I am the Lord, for those who wait for Me shall not be ashamed"
Isa60:"..And foreigners shall build your walls, and their kings shall serve you..For the nation and the kingdom that shall not serve you shall perish, and the nations shall be destroyed...And the children of your oppressors shall go to you bent over, and those who despised you shall prostrate themselves at the soles of your feet..".
The end of the book of Isaiah is repleat with such references of "glad-tidings" to the Jews towards the end of times, the messianic era, a time where
Isa66:23"all flesh shall come to prostrate themselves before Me"
and where the remaining lucky survivors will see all around them
"the corpses of the people who rebelled against Me, for their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring for all flesh".
This represents, according to Zech13:8-9 roughly 2/3 of the world population, exterminated, with 1/3 remaining for having converted to Judaism. Following their subjugation and destruction, the wicked will be sentenced to gehinnom (see Rashi on Ps6:11).
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
So how about Jesus, what did he think of the law of Moses, or salvation through deeds?
Through a concise statement, the Quran explains the mutual relationship between the Torah and the Gospel; they complete one another by centering the attention on the wisdom and spirit of every aspect of God's Laws so that they do not end up as something lifeless and burdensome for the people
3:48-50"And He will teach him the Book and the wisdom and the Tawrat and the Injeel..And a verifier of that which is before me of the Taurat and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you, and I have come to you with a sign from your Lord therefore be careful of (your duty to) Allah and obey me".
By the beginning of the 1st century Judaism was a sterile, lifeless organism, waiting to be infused with a spirituality that only Jesus could provide.
Jesus repeatedly condemned those traditions in the NT, denounced the Jews and their leaders as "hypocrites" and told the people to beware of these "teachers of law" for their soulless traditions, and "children of the Devil" because of their claim of inherited righteousness through their affiliation to Abraham Jn8:37-44.
Not in one single instance within the whole NT is it reported that Jesus said that the law of Moses needs to be abandoned, contrary to Paul who besides stating it was a curse Gal3:13 given not by God but by angels Gal3:19-25,Heb2:2 declared it obsolete Rom3:20,7:4,10:4,Heb8:13,Gal2:21,3:23-25,4:21-31,5:1,Eph2:15 even describing his former Jewish beliefs as worthless, rejecting his former Jewishness by warning of Jewish dogs saying in the original Greek
Phil3:2-8"I consider them excrement".
He told people he was seeking to convert that they were now under the vague 'law of Christ'. Jesus himself never alludes to such law, hence it being unknown to any of those who met and followed him and respected all Jewish laws to the letter as per his actual instructions. That law of christ, tailored so as to apeal to Paul's mainly pagan audience, has removed the old burden from mankind 1Corin9:21,Gal6:2.
He sometimes paid lip service to the Law if the situation or audience required a show of obedience to the law Acts21:20-26 but immidiately denounced the likes of James and Peter for telling the Gentiles to follow the law Gal2, evidently because it attracted less converts.
In answer to the video "Islamic Original Sin Dilemma: Introduction: Are Muslims Born Sinless?"
3:45"Allah gives you good news with a word/kalima from Him (of one) whose name is the Messiah, Isa son of Marium".
Kalimatun, which means word or statement has a feminine designation. But what follows is in the masculine, making Jesus and word/statement 2 distinct entities. This is because Jesus is the product of the creative word, not the word itself
4:171"The messiah, Jesus, son of Mary was none other than Allah's envoy and His statement/kalima, He casted it towards Mary including a life giving breath from Him (Allah)".
It literally says Jesus, the human prophet, born of Mary, was a statement cast towards his mother. It does not say the intangible "pre-incarnate" Jesus was a word cast to Mary. This is what one with a hellenistic theological background would read into the verse.
The precision of the verse does not end here. It does not say the word was cast inside of Mary, rather ila/towards Mary. For that "pre incarnate" Jesus/word to become flesh, it would have necessitated for it to enter Mary. So clearly, no human being was literally cast to Mary, and neither does it say it entered her. Simply, Allah cast his statement, His command to Mary. That statement allowed the miraculous process by which a particular human being came to existence. Jesus was not God's word, as denoted in 3:45 but became God's word. Exactly as Adam manifested the creative word of God. Or as the prophet Yahya/John was the manifestation of God's word, given the particular circumstances of his birth
3:39"Allah gives you the good news of Yahya verifying a word/kalima from Allah".
Kalimatullah in these contexts is thus not some pre-existing entity seperate from God in an intangible shape before becoming physical. It is a command from God that allows a process by which certain physical entities come into being. Adam, Jesus or John did not pre-exist as intangible entities prior to manifesting God's word in physical form.
Further, the word of God manifests in different ways in this world, not only physical. Kalimatullah is also used in the sense of God's promise 6:34,115,10:64,18:27 etc. Such divine word is a command that can never be reversed or altered once issued 13:41, it can be the promise of victory and assistance to the messengers and their followers 37:171-2 or the promise of chastisement to the rejecters 58:21 or again the promises of miracles or blessings whether in this life or the next. This is because, as repeatedly said in the Book, Allah's statement is truthful and He never breaks His promise
10:55,33:4,38:34"The truth then is and the truth do I speak" 39:20"Allah will not fail in (His promise)".
The association of the kalima of Allah with something also seems to imply truth. This is highly appropriate in light of the descriptions made of Jesus in the NT where he makes false prophecies. Only truth emanates from Allah and Jesus' association with the kalima makes him the embodiment of truth.
The particularities of Yahya/John and Jesus' births, do not make any of them different or special than other human beings in terms of their physical nature. Neither were these miraculous circumstances necessary to accommodate the false notions retrospectively applied to them. For example Jesus did not need to come from a virgin to circumvent human depravity, something Jesus never even spoke of. Neither did Jesus need to combine the immaterial/RUH of Allah, with the material/human mother so as to assume his dual human/divine nature. All humanity has exactly this same dual aspect as Jesus, without any of us being divine. Man has both a principal and a secondary nature. His secondary nature returns to dust and his essence is related to Allah. This is why the Quran attributes the spirit to Allah and the body to the earth 38:71-72.
The Quran leaves no room to the kind of conjecture trinitarians are known for when approaching their Bible, let alone the Quran. Christians feel comforted whenever they superficially approach the Quran and find these familiar Christological themes. They are sometimes bold enough to assume the Quran is confirming their doctrines. After all, none other than Jesus is referred to as God's word, His messiah or a RUH from Allah. But by doing so Christians are missing the consistent Quranic approach of taking up the major trinitarian themes and labels associated to Jesus, then recasts them in a monotheistic, unitarian perspective. It is the case with the kalima, just as with the RUH/spirit or the name "messiah". Jesus is not the literal nor metaphorical "son of God" but simply, the son of Mary as Christians themselves cannot deny. Similarly, Jesus is stripped from any intrinsic power as regards his ascension and ability to perform miracles.
Being the muhaymin/guardian of the previous scriptures and traditions, the Quran could not leave those themes unaddressed. And it does so in an impactful way, using them just as is done in Christian scriptures, while redefining them so as to deny their Christological background.
That corrective function goes beyond these aforementioned pillars of Christology. In the Gospels' eschatology, the trinitarian godhead is at the forefront and Jesus is given the leading role of judgement by his "father" Matt25,26. In the Quran, no possible ambiguity exists as to Allah's supremacy on that day, whether in terms of glory, authority or judgement.
Jesus and John were mortals, made from exactly the same elements as other humans, and could not have come into existence without God's word 2:117"Be". The word symbolizes that nothing escapes His grasp in the chain of causality. He may use His command to initiate the chain by creating out of nothing, or He may us it to intervene in a pre-existing chain of causality so as to result in the outcome that He wills
3:59"Surely the likeness of Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, "Be", and he was".
This is an instance of Allah using His word to complete a process. Both Adam and Jesus came to completion through Allah's word. Prior to that completion Adam was fashioned from inorganic earthly elements, or as the Quran quotes Allah
38:75"him whom I created with My own hands".
All things were, and are created by Allah's direct involvement. Mankind is no different but because it is a specie with a special connection with its Creator, the Quran uses the image of Allah using His own hands doing so, as a metaphor of special care in fashioning and forming it. When that fashioning process reached physical completion, Adam was ready to receive the spirit from Allah 38:71-2. It is at that point that Allah "said to him, "Be", and he was". That command is what triggered all components within Adam, the physical and the spiritual to fuse and ignite, resulting in what is understood by a "human being"; a creature whose flesh and spirit function simultaneously and interdependently.
Without God's word, the mere entry of the spirit within the flesh would not cause this creature to function as a human being. One can finish building a robot, then place its batteries, but it will only function once the switch is turned on. God's word is the switch that ignites the human being, allowing its material and spiritual components to work together.
The process that preceded Allah's command was different in Jesus' case. Unlike Adam, he was not first fashioned from earthly substance, but through the RUH that entered the body of his mother so as to allow her to conceive. At some point during the development of the fetus, Allah's word was cast towards Mary. This was the trigger allowing the fusion of the RUH that had entered her prior, with the fetus, resulting in a creature whose flesh and spirit function together.
A question one might ask is why, if all human beings, including Adam and Jesus, were brought to completion through Allah's word, why did the Quran choose to parallel Adam specifically with Jesus in order to deny Jesus' divinity? Adam is the archetypical human being, made from the dust of the earth. No human being after Adam, endowed with the spirit of Allah, is closer to its original earthly substance than him. In the context of refuting Jesus' divinity, and stressing his humanity, no point of reference among any human being is more appropriate than the human who is closest to its worldly, earthly, humble origins than Adam. Further, the one who is alleged to be a god-man, is as helpless in the process of his completion than a human being made of dust. What kind of deity cannot come into existence in whatever shape and nature, without the intervention of a higher power?
The main idea behind the statement, "then said to him "Be" and he is", often used for God's creative action, is that Allah masters the laws of causality. The imperative form gives a sense of absolute control, contrary to the similar but softer Biblical "Let there be". Grammatically, the statement "kun fa yakun/be and he is" is an idiom. Its constituents, like the gender/tenses/persons remain unchanged regardless of the sentence in which the idiom is integrated. The present tense, although speaking of a past event, also serves as a literary device to involve the audience/reader, making him the spectator of the event as it is unfolding, as if the coming to existence is happening now, in front of him.
