You can't go part way on this issue. Either Jesus is the son of God
and the Savior of the world or he was at best a delusional madman or at worse Satans pawn. I
profess that I believe that Jesus was sent to die for our sins and offer salvation to all that
accept him. If you don't choose that your choice is against Christ. If you want to call him
a prophet, messenger or any other religious title that shows a lack of consideration and
study. How can he claim to be the son of God and be considered sane if his claims are
untrue?
Rapture Ready Message Board: cmur322 on September 26th, 2003
The posting quoted above was one of many in response to a Muslim's posting in affirmation of their love and respect for Jesus. I propose that those who recognize Jesus a Prophet and Messenger of God are amongst the most enlightened of mankind.
The disciples of Jesus thought that He was a Prophet (John 6:14, 9:17) as this was a teaching of Jesus Himself (Matthew 13: 57, Luke 13: 3, John 4:44). Did Jesus thus "lack... consideration and study" because this is what He believed of His station?
While it is true that John the Baptist denied (John 1:21) and Jesus never claimed being
"The Prophet" spoken of by Moses, a case could be made that
Muhammad was indeed that very Prophet: In Deuteronomy 18:15 Moses says: The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like Me from among you, from
your brethren, you shall listen to Him.
The key phrases in this verse are: "a
Prophet like Me" and "from among your brethren. You shall listen to Him."
| Moses | Muhammad |
|---|---|
| Orphaned; adopted and raised by: | |
| Pharaoh | Muhammad's uncle |
| Exiled: | |
| From Egypt to Sanai desert | From Mecca to Medina |
| Promulgated strong civil and religious laws: | |
| 10 Commandments. | Qur'an |
| Leader of their nation: | |
| Israel | Arabia |
| Fought heathens*: | |
| Baalists | Mecan Idolators |
* Note: The battles Muhammad waged against the Mecans were always of defensive character: the Jewish wars were admittedly more severe (see Deut. 20: 10-17). The only time Muhammad made war against the Jews was when they aligned with the Mecan idolaters and actively battled against Him. Why did the Mecan idolators resist Muhammad? ...because He taught of Allah ("the One God") and the Prophets (Jesus included). And why did the Jews league with pagan idolaters to resist Muhammad? ...for the same reason they sided with the pagan Romans to resist Jesus.
The similarities between Moses and Muhammad extend even to such details as
Jesus was not a Prophet like Moses: Jesus was not married, had no children, did not establish social laws, did not lead a nation, did not fight heathens, had a very brief ministry, and died an unnatural death at a young age. Muhammad was a Prophet like Moses.
Muhammad appeared in Arabia in the midst of the dispersed Jewish tribes. What Moses meant by saying that the Prophet would come "from among your (i.e. the Jews) brethren" is that He would be descended from Abraham's first son, Ishmael – the father of the Arab race. Abraham's second son, Issac, was the father of the Jewish race. Thus the Arabs are the brethren of the Jews. Muhammad was an Arab. Aramaic, the language spoken by the Jews in Israel from about 300 BC, is related to Arabic – both being Semitic tongues.
The conventional Christian spin on the phrase "...from among your brethren" is that it means from amongst the Jews, and thus refers to Jesus. However, if Moses had intended the Jewish population as the milieu of the Prophet, He would have said "...from amongst you" or "...from amongst the children of Israel." Jesus was a Jew (John 1:11) – not an Arab as foretold by Moses of the Prophet. Muhammad arose from amongst the brethren of the Hebrews – the Arabs.
Moses told the Jewish people: "You shall listen to Him (the Prophet)." Yet when Muhammad did come they treated Him almost as viscously as they treated Jesus. Nevertheless Jews were subjugated under Muslim rule for about 1300 years, hearing five times a day, every day, the Muslim call to prayer, that "there is no God but the one God, and Muhammad is His Messenger"
The Hebrews listened to (The Prophet) Muhammad.
Though known in the West only as "Muhammad", He is known in the East by a number of other names (all derived from the same Arabic root "to praise") including "Mahmud", "Ahmad", etc. It is interesting to note that the name "Ahmad" means "Paraclete" in Arabic. Jesus promised that He would send another (John 16:7). His words (spoken in Aramaic) were later recorded in Greek as "Paracletos" which means "Helper" in English.
The following chart shows how Muhammad was a "Helper" to Christians; Muhammad's mission was, in large part, to cleanse Christianity of false teachings (Matthew 13:24-30) that Jesus knew would be introduced into His religion:
| Adulterated by man | Purified by Muhammad |
|---|---|
| Three gods in One. | God is One and indivisible. |
| Sacraments, superstitions, priestly powers, celibacy. | Highly personal relationship with God, pure and simple religion. |
| Jesus is God. | "We are God's Messengers" |
The standard Christian belief is that "The Helper" (Gr. Paracletos) that Jesus said He would send (John 16:7) is the Holy Spirit. If that were true it would mean that the Holy Spirit was never in the world until after the ascention of Jesus. Further, if Jesus meant to send the Holy Spirit, why did He not say so?
In addition to purifying Christianity, Muhammad saw His mission as a judgement upon the sin of the Jews for their loss due to rejection their Messiah Jesus (See John 16: 8-11)
After talking about the Helper, Jesus continues talking about yet another Who will come – The Spirit of Truth (John 16: 12-15) – and this is likely the cause of the confusion the Christians.
As I said, " a case could be made..." and I'm not a Muslim – just an open minded seeker after Truth.
The posting to which I am commenting also objects to Jesus being described by the religious title of "Messenger" which is similarly characterized as showing "a lack of consideration and study." That writer seems to prefer his own ideas about Jesus over that which the Rabbi Jesus Himself taught, which was:
...I did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me commandant, what to say, and what to speak... I speak just as the Father has told Me. John 12:49,50
...The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative...John 14:10
...the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's Who sent Me.John 14:24
Having now given this concern due "consideration and study" it is clear that someone who delivers another's message is properly called a "messenger." Jesus plainly taught that He was God's Messenger, so why should we believe otherwise?
Jesus never claimed to be God, nor did He claim to be equal to God:
And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.Mark 10:18
...I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.John 14:28
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.Mark 13:32
When Jesus said Before Abraham was, I AM
, His enemies
incorrectly assumed that Jesus was claiming to be God. If we are to believe the station claimed
by Jesus as the Messenger of God (John 12:49-50; 14:10, 24), His statement quoted immediately
above can not be interpreted as Jesus claiming to be God, but must be understood as being a
message delivered by Jesus from God claiming to be God.
Many will, no doubt, agree with the original writer who posted the statement that any
religious title for Jesus other than "Son of God" is ignorant and thoughtless. The
danger with this is that you put Jesus and His chosen into that category, as they used and
accepted many apellations for Jesus other than "Son of God." Jesus was called by many
fine titles – only a few of which He rejected; e.g.: Jesus rejected the title of
"Prince of Peace" in saying Do not think that I came to
bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword
(Matt.
10:34) and which might explain why His professed followers have seen fit to bring to
mankind the abominations of the Crusades, Inquisition, Dark Ages, Conquistadores, Witch Hunts,
virulent racism, two world wars, and the Holocaust (see Matthew 7:15, 17).
So, was Jesus "the Son of God" or was He "at best a
delusional madman or at worse Satans pawn." I don't see how we're limited to that
exclusive choice. Obviously, Muslims are correct in saying that Jesus was a Prophet and God's
Messenger, because (as shown previously) Jesus clearly said so. Muslims honour Jesus greatly
and hold Him equal to their own Prophet. They do not call Jesus delusional, so why be so vulgar
as to impute that sentiment to Muslims unless your intention is to promote hatred and fear? And
if this is your secret intention, why do you call Jesus "Lord, Lord" and do not do
what He says? I confess that I have seen more grace and truth from my Muslim friends than I see
in this thread. Your words remind me of the tone of
the anti-Semite father of Christian
Protestantism (Martin Luther) who said of the Jews: Whoever would
like to cherish such adders and puny devils – who are the worst enemies of Christ and us
all – to befriend them and to do them honour simply in order to be cheated, plundered,
robbed, disgraced, and forced to howl and curse and suffer every kind of evil, to him I would
commend the Jews. And if this is not enough, let him tell the Jews to use his mouth as a privy,
or else crawl into the Jew's hind parts, and there worship the holy thing, so as afterwards to
be able to boast of having been merciful, and of having helped the Devil and his progeny to
blaspheme our dear Lord.
Martin Luther, quoted in
"Hitler's Spiritual Ancestor" by Peter F. Weiner (1985, Gustav Broukal
Press)
Jesus did teach that He was the Son of God, but you must understand that the Qur'an was revealed more than 600 years after the mission of Jesus at a time 300 years after Christianity eventually adopted the doctrine of the trinity – a doctrine that Jesus did not teach and which He rejected (Mark, 12:29, 12:32; see also Exodus 20:3). What is rejected in the Qur'an is that the one true God could (like the Mecan polytheists imagined) be three. What the Qur'an rejects is that the Uncreated could become created, that the Eternal Being could die, and that the Transcendent could become transient. The trinity doctrine is a matter of theology – one of which Christian denominations are not in agreement. The trinity is a dogma that – despite voluminous attempts of the greatest minds over millennia – remains incomprehensible and yet something of a selling point for Christianity amongst the credulous, as with Tertullian who wrote: "I believe because it is impossible." As regards the transcendence and unity of God, and the station of God's Messengers – the fact is that Islam is much more akin to Judaism (the other religion that Protestants love to hate) than it is to Christianity.
In the Mosaic Law (Psalms 82:6) it is written that God says: You
are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.
If you were to explain to a
Muslim that being a "Son of God" is not unique to Jesus and that all men have the
potential to be brothers of Christ and "Son's of God" (Matt 12:49, John 1:12, 1 John
3:1) – then I think they would readily agree that Christ was the "Son of God" so
long as you leave out reference to incarnation.
The idea of God's incarnation has been promoted by citing the virgin birth. Many passages indicate that one proof of Jesus as Messiah is that He was descended from David's line through His step-father, Joseph (Luke 3:23-38, 4:22; John 1:45, 6:42).Aside from the fact that the geneologies presented in Matthew and Luke are contradictory, the main problem here is that Joseph was not the father of Jesus, and Mary was a Levite not descended from David. But the greatness of Jesus Christ consists of His spiritual perfections and prophetic gifts which were born of God and which were bestowed upon Jesus at His baptism, not from the fact of a virgin birth. If His greatness depended on having no physical father, then the Jewish expectation of a Messiah descended from David remains unfulfilled, and we should give greater worship to Adam, the eldest "Son of God" (Luke 3:38) and to Melchizedek (Heb.7:3) inasmuch as both were born without either father or mother.
The title that Jesus personally favored was "Son of Man" which is used some 83 times in the NT – over twice the number of references to His being God's son, and an indication of the relative importance Jesus gave to the two titles.
Author – John Roncalio. © 2003, John Roncalio.
The views expressed herein are those of the author who is solely responsible for their
contents.