My Dear BOAZ,

Above, I was asking, on what basis the author you cited could support his claim... Q? The history and the nature of the Dispora of the Jesus groups and Jewish communities are known and some [differing]gospel fragments do exist [physical evidence].

Relatedly, I don't see it spectulative that first century peoples separated in time [decades] and distance would develop their own Jesus accounts. The contradictions are not always evident from Christian sources, because, as a result of Nicaea, "Correctors" were employed to harmonise the gospels and other scriptures. Some early materials have only become available in last sixty years, escaping the post-Nicean Christian fires. Moreover, one can rightfully draw comparisons between fourth century Christianity and today's Taliban, down the destruction of an ancient statue.

Back to the Muslims: It is certain that the history of Mohammed is better known than the life of Jesus:

When Islam found it hard to gain acceptance, as a parallel [prophetic] religion to Christianity and Judaism, it seems these guys, the Muslims i.e, leaped-from backwards to Abraham, wherein, all are loved by God, not just denominational enclaves.

In some ways, early Islam encountered the same problem with Jewish scholars, as did Jesus with the Pharisees, i.e., a conflict between prophetic teaching [Jesus & Mohammed] and a religion-based penchant towards observance of the pedantic. Conflicts "within" Islam came about because of political conflicts over succession from the Prophet.

Islam is more cross-cultrally tolerant than Christianity or Judaism, accepting, as the prophets, the prophets or god, of the older religions. Herein, Islam is more universal in its approach: It maintains a belief in a god whom dialogues with the faithful of many societies, not, exclusively.



- What do you understand by, "The People of the Book"?

[p.s.The Jesus thread you started still has loose ends]

Regards.

Boaz,

"Our discussions have nothing to do with 'me' being 'right' and you being wrong. They have to do with Islam and Christianity, and the truth or falsehood of them"

Thanks for admitting the first part : -) The second part is interesting. Why not just accept there are 2 views on Jesus (pbuh). I mean, you reached that with the Jewish faith and now you pride yourself on Judeo-Christianity thing, right?

Islam and Christianity are the largest 2 religions today and people with wisdom and knowledge should focus on how can we bridge the two for a better future and harmonise their resources to fight poverty and diseases. Sounds you are still stuck in the Crusades age and 'us or them' mentality.

Peace,

The Qur'an is influenced by much of Catholic theology in 600 AD and reflects many of the common denials made by Judaism in its era of Christ. It is limited in its context and culture to the period of its writing. As was Catholicism it was more interested in Nationalism and political control than in understanding God and living in the character of God.

Jesus was never party to subduing nations by the sword, which seemed the primary mission of Catholiciam and Mohamet in the 7th century. To subdue nations meaning the will of the people must be changed or removed by threat of death or terror. Muslims will not accept democracy as from Allah, as we witness in Afganistan and Iraq. Anyone who promotes personal freedoms they believe opposes Allah. Islam's primary tenet is submission to Allah, even if it has to be enforced by law with the penalty of death.

Christ taught the freedom of every man of his conscience and will; for unless these function in individual choice then the heart is bound by another. It is under these principles that Christianity differs.

Hello Philo,

Agree with most of your post. Islam was constructed to unify the Arabs, first priority. Jesus seems to have taught about the Kingdom of Heaven and saw his life and death as substitution of the Jewish Law/Rites. Christianity is in a third corner, political and utilising Jesus, but adopting centuries of Chinese whispers and accreditions.

The pre-Moses Hebrews were henothesists emphasising a tribal god [YHWH]over other gods whom nonetheless existed. [Albeit YHWH was a subordinate god in the El godhead]. Moses promoted that tribal god. The Arabs were a little different. They had tribal gods: al-Lah was instilled in lieu of the earlier gods.

Unlike the Catholic Christianity, Islam stresses the importance of "reason" and "curiosity" [Armstrong], and the development of the intellect; herein, ayat [messages] can be better understood.

YHWH of the OT, may have more common with Allah than Jesus, the former, especially YHWH, are warlike; whereas, as you say, Jesus was not. YHWH was culturally centric [unlike Jesus or Abraham (?)], Alah was universalist and focused on building a just society and opposed injustice. In its earlier days, Islam recognised The People of the Book as having their on prophetic [Jesus as a prophet] relevation and there was no pressure in Islam to convert Christians or Jews to Islam.

Jihad is a struggle against injustice. Politicised this meant rading Jewish landholders and sharing the booty with Arab communities: A barstardision of taking from the rich to give to the poor. There were campaigns into Northern Africa too.

Regards.

BOAZ,

- What do you understand by The People of The Book?

KR, O.