No Muslim will say the Qur’an is the “rest of the story” to the New Testament. The New Testament’s theology doesn’t sit well with the Qur’an at all. Just like the New Testament’s theology won’t sit well with the Old Testament theology.
The New Testament versions themselves are testament enough to it’s meddling by the lying pen of the scribes.
Anyway, good to ready you KoncreteMind
Disagreed on that one (which you might have expected). Barring the translations, the theology of the NT cannot be wrong as it implies that the NT was corrupt long before the Quran came. Then why did the Quran speak of the Gospels as a 'guidance and light' in the present tense eg what the christians posessed in their hands at that time?
Furthermore, the Quran repeatedly speaks of the Scripture and the Hikmah(wisdom). Notice it never says 'sunnah'. The sunnah would be the hikmah of the prophet(s), however few muslims seem to understand how hikmah applies in different contexts. If you read the entire bible inc the NT then you begin to understand relevant contexts.
The Quran also states that Allah inspired the disciples to believe and that He granted the believers amongst the israelites victory over the disbelievers. So the ones who followed Jesus, they were guided by God to the truth and not to falsehood. If Paul was an imposter, that only proves the Quran wrong here. So it's better to just go with what is there and work with it.
I can use Paul's argument to support islam.
think about this
According to Paul
-The Mosaic law doesn't make people righteous. It's design is to make sin apparent thereby creating a context to reveal God's GRACE (and hence Jesus and all that).
-Abraham wasn't reckoned by works, but by faith. He circumcised himself after he'd already proven his faith. Therefore circumcision doesn't make a person righteous in the eyes of God (that is despite the Covenant of the flesh/circumcision in Genesis 17), unless it is also a circumcision of the heart (with faith). The patriarchs all lived in faith prior to the law of Moses.
-Paul likened the new christians (and this was geared really more towards the gentiles) to the Patriarchs eg they didn't need a law.
Here's what my argument kicks in
If God saw fit to give the Israelites a law, after they were already existing in faith, why couldn't God do that once again with the gentiles? What happened to the Israelites? they lived in egypt for 400 yrs and lost their belief. The same is true for christianity, once it went into europe, it lost it's essence. Eg the 'son' is a symbolic judaic term, the romans took that literally. They innovated the religion and created the trinitarian doctrine. So just like the israelites were then given a law, the gentiles were given a law (through the Quran).
Even using Paul's understanding of the purpose of the law eg to reveal the depths of sin..this is more apparent in islam than anything.
For example, alcohol wasnt forbidden prior...so if any prophet drank alcohol, it was a normal thing.
Yet when a muslim drinks it, it's one of the major sins aswell as a major fitna for muslims in general. This is even more the case when muslims are trying to hold onto their ideals in a 'westernised' world.
It just means that muslims have experienced a greater 'depth' of sin than any one else before...and that means muslims NEED/REQUIRE the Grace of God more than anyone else before. Since that's supposed to come through the messiah, it literally means we need him more than christians do.
Furthermore, from a spiritual perspective, what makes Jesus great isn't that he's going to conquer lands and rule..his greatness is in his ability to elevate people spiritually. He is greater through islam than he is through christianity alone.
God saw fit to reveal the law to Moses in order to magnify the Grace of God coming through Jesus Christ later. the fulfillment of the law IS the Grace of God.
these online christians literally only think of the second coming of Jesus when they're watching a hyde park debate. they're like
'wen jezuz? jezuz plz throw dem muslims in da lake of fire asap plz'
and when all else fails they shout 'dat iz takiya tho'.
honestly, i dont want to be a dick here..but i literally just cant see how they have any connection to Jesus in anything but name.
they dont believe what they say about him, they just say it to debate muslims and that's all about stroking their ego. do they really think Jesus is fully God whilst knowing full well Jesus openly said 'i dont even know when the last hour is? only the Father knows'?
i know this isnt about Paul, but Paul was heavily critical of the jews in his time, so it's only fair i extend his form of criticism towards these christians).
don't get me wrong, i believe there were authentic christians too, but they were persecuted for it. Madam Guyon is one i always mention. Even despite her theological weaknesses, in terms of the metaphysics, what she experienced and represented was the same path the likes of Rabia Basri experienced. she was on that level. A true seeker, not some bs online 'takiya' xtian. Those type of christians are very very rate, i dont think that are any left like that.
Jesus apparently came to fulfill the law. The jews interpreted this as a messiah who literally lives by the letter of the law. Remember in the hadith it says Isa AS will judge us according to the Quran, not the Gospel? well the typical muslim literally imagines Jesus holding the Quran and holding muslims to it's laws in the most literal sense.
Now, the wisdom in the story of Khidr and Moses is that Moses lived in duality and Khidr transcendence duality, existing in a state of unity. This is taoist wisdom eg yin/yang..and the Tao. It's about not seeing opposites.
eg
The Tao doesn’t take sides; it gives birth to both good and evil. The Master doesn’t take sides; she welcomes both saints and sinners.
This whole theme is lost on Christians. They don't get it at all. For example, it said
The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
Jesus was Shiloh, according to the NT itself. The parable of the tenants was also indicative of the period of gentiles coming after jews get kicked out. Revelation 11 itself also foretold the period of the gentiles (fulfilled by islamic rule over Jerusalem).
Jesus first came 'only to the lost sheep of israel' and on his return is coming for everyone inc gentiles.
Actually a lot of what Jesus was living by. It is from the state of Ihsan rather than Islam...hence Paul was saying 'the law is slavery,