MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
Yes, Muslims tend to view Jesus and the greatest of the prophets, but don't have much respect for his disciples or their version of the gospel.
We are all God's children.
A rather odd statement for an atheist to say....
Nah, we're all in Clan MacTavish.A rather odd statement for an atheist to say....
Last night on "The Daily Show," Jon Stewart mocked the media's obsession with would-be Quran-burning pastor Terry Jones, and showed how Fox News considers reasonable statements by "Ground Zero Mosque" Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to be veiled threats to further their fear-driven narrative.
First addressing Terry "Yosemite" Jones's plan to burn Qurans on 9/11, Stewart pointed out that God both called for and called off the burning, according to Jones.
"When God told you to do it originally, he hadn't anticipated the backlash?" Stewart asked of Jones. "God didn't see that one coming?"
Stewart likened the media's constant coverage of the crazy pastor to the dog from the movie "Up!" It's like no matter what is going on the world, they will drop everything if they see a squirrel. In this case, the squirrel is an irrational person who thinks burning books is OK.
Speaking of irrationality, Stewart moved on to re-discuss the "Ground Zero Mosque" controversy, but particularly Fox News' nonsensical fear of Imam Rauf. Fox demands the Imam answer their question of "Why there?" but when he calmly explains on CNN that moving the center would send a message to Muslim nations that Islam is under attack in the U.S., and that "anger will explode in the Muslim world," all Fox hears is "explode."
Stewart pointed out that using the threat of violence, which is what Fox News consider Rauf's explanation to be, to "expedite a desired outcome," is exactly what Fox News does when it pushes for a conservative candidate. The proof lies in Stewart's clips of Dick Cheney, Mitt Romney, Sean Hannity, and others sounding way more ominous than Rauf.
I think that a couple of blocks away is a sign of defeat. We should replace the mosque that was destroyed by the terrorists on 9/11 - http://www.businessinsider.com/there-already-was-a-ground-zero-mosque-2010-9.
Put a new mosque in the footprint.
Muslims believe that Jesus did not claim to be the literal Son of God, holding it to be a literal distortion which confused his metaphorical assertion- as suggested by Jolly Roger- for his actual message. Similarly, they revere the prophets of the Old Testament, and hold it to be a valid history, but consider it to be a distortion of God's word, and so not a holy text in itself (although many hold that Islam prescribes respect for the holy texts of others).
It may also surprise you to learn that people of many religions, even those outside of the Abrahamic fold, revere Jesus. Hindus often see him as an incarnation of Krishna, while many Buddhist hold him to be a Bodhisattva (an enlightened being), some going so far as to describe him as an incarnation of Avalokiteśvara, the Buddha of compassion. Some simply see him as a sage of great wisdom, or a good person worthy of emulation. Reverence, you see, doesn't necessarily accepting the New Testament as indisputable canon.
Actually, I'm lead to believe that both Jesus and Moses are held to have got God's word bang on, it was just their followers who screwed it up.
Which shouldn't really be hard for Christians to get their head around. After all, Domination is a protestant,so he holds Catholicism to be a form of Christianity, but one that screwed up some of the details. It's pretty much the same thing, just at a more fundamental level.
We are all God's children.
Well, it certainly suggests that the man and his message have a very deep resonance with many people. If you attribute this to his divine status, then that is valid, within the context of your own faith.I would consider this to be evidence he really was who he said he was.
By Muslims, and in regards to that part of their preaching that was revealed by God. I'm given to understand that Sunni Muslims do not attribute full infallibility to individuals, and the Shi'ites only to Muhammad, his immediate descendants, and certain senior Shi'ite clerics.You mean by Muslims or Christians?
Christ himself wasn't wrong about anything, Moses was, but not about anything that was inspired.
It was intended as an analogy, to demonstrate how people may agree on a fundamental point, in this case, that Jesus was the legitimate messenger of God, and disagree about elaborations therein, in this case, whether Jesus was divine or a prophet. I didn't mean to suggest that Muslims are Christians, nor am I entirely sure how you inferred that.Well, I've heard some people I respect say that Catholicism isn't really Christianity, but I don't really know enough about the issue. Regardless, some Catholics are certainly Christian, others do not believe the true gospel (Though the same could be said of some protestants.)
However, Catholics, while they hold a really, really distorted view of it, still hold to Jesus as the Son of God. Same thing with Mormons. While I consider Mormonism to be a VERY, VERY messed up version of Christianity, since they do hold that one fundamental belief, it is sensible that SOME real Christians were tricked into it.
If you don't believe Jesus is the Son of God (Which the Muslims do not) you cannot be a real Christian. Period. Muslims are not Christians. And I really don't get how some of them consider Christians to be Muslims, as according to them, the Christians believe in three gods![]()
Now that's an ungenerous reading.Wrong. Only those whom he has saved.
True...Well, it certainly suggests that the man and his message have a very deep resonance with many people. If you attribute this to his divine status, then that is valid, within the context of your own faith.
By Muslims, and in regards to that part of their preaching that was revealed by God. I'm given to understand that Sunni Muslims do not attribute full infallibility to individuals, and the Shi'ites only to Muhammad, his immediate descendants, and certain senior Shi'ite clerics.
It was intended as an analogy, to demonstrate how people may agree on a fundamental point, in this case, that Jesus was the legitimate messenger of God, and disagree about elaborations therein, in this case, whether Jesus was divine or a prophet. I didn't mean to suggest that Muslims are Christians, nor am I entirely sure how you inferred that.![]()
Now that's an ungenerous reading.![]()
Anyway, as Erin says, let's not get too deep into the theology (because, if nothing else, neither of us are exactly experts).
Is it an incorrect statement?
Muslims believe that Jesus did not claim to be the literal Son of God, holding it to be a literal distortion which confused his metaphorical assertion- as suggested by Jolly Roger- for his actual message. Similarly, they revere the prophets of the Old Testament, and hold it to be a valid history, but consider it to be a distortion of God's word, and so not a holy text in itself (although many hold that Islam prescribes respect for the holy texts of others).
It may also surprise you to learn that people of many religions, even those outside of the Abrahamic fold, revere Jesus. Hindus often see him as an incarnation of Krishna, while many Buddhist hold him to be a Bodhisattva (an enlightened being), some going so far as to describe him as an incarnation of Avalokiteśvara, the Buddha of compassion. Some simply see him as a sage of great wisdom, or a good person worthy of emulation. Reverence, you see, doesn't necessarily accepting the New Testament as indisputable canon.
An atheist would say so.
Why on earth are you guys still discussing this?
Its a community center with a Mosque inside one part of it.
So there's no irreverence or insensitivity or whatever being shown by the building of this community center/mosque thing. The only insensitivity being shown is by the opposition, who rather blatantly conflate all of Islam with the radical nonsense of a few extremists and pretend that the opinions of people who were unlucky enough to lose someone on 9/11 should matter in a building project a decade later that just happens to be on the same island as where their relatives died.
You have to understand that "Islam" is more nuanced a term than "Christianity". It can refer both to the religion of Islam, and to the philosophical concept of Islam, which is to say the concept of "submission to God"; as such, any monotheists, and in some schools of thought, pantheists, are "Muslims", of varying degrees of purity, because they all submit themselves to God. Even Heaven Worship, a monotheistic religion which developed in Ancient China, is considered to be Islamic in this sense, because it preaches submission to God, it is simply a deeply impure version, which lacks any sort of divine revelation.Well, some Muslims think that Christians simply follow a modified and somewhat distorted version of Islam. I've never seen a REAL Christian call Islam Christianity.
Well, according to yourself. Most people to not hold such a reading, and it's not necessarily a theological difference, either- the Scots are staunchly Calvinist, which would suggest they hold your view, yet gave rise to the expression "We're all Jock Tamson's bairns" (Jock Tamson being a euphemism for God), which declares exactly the same sentiment.Well, its true![]()
Perhaps, but a working knowledge of theology requires more than a myopically specific knowledge of a particular sect, no matter how deep and full it may be.Not of other faiths anyway, I know quite a bit about my own![]()
As a factual statement, perhaps, but the sentiment rings true none the less.An atheist would say so.
@Storical: I also am planning to go when/if it gets built.... Especially to check out their food court (one of my fondest memories of the Middle East was the food, especially the Schwerma....)