stretch

Hi Hawkingfan,

Personally, I don't think it's ridiculous to ask for an independent scholarly or semi-scholarly source for your assertions about what Muslims generally believe.

In my line of work, asking for reliable sources is not considered petty ... it's considered standard practice.

I really don't think I'm asking you to do anything particularly difficult.

As for your last little snippet, knowing something about the basic way in which theological thought has historically developed in Islam, does not make me an expert in what Islam teaches. Surprise, surprise.

Cross Examiner

Mr. Unknown Banana, you wrote:

Let's start simply, with a few prophecies directed towards the main object of Scripture, Christ:
-Isaiah 52:13-53:12 fortells Jesus Christ's experience of suffering in detail, in accordance with his biographies.
-Micah 5:2 foretells that the Christ must be born in Bethlehem, in accordance with his biographies.
-Zechariah 9:9 foretells that Messiah would enter Jerusalem on a simple donkey (i.e. not a Warhorse), in accordance with his biographies.
-Zechariah 12:10 foretells that Christ would be physically peirced (e.g by a Roman spear, Roman nails) killed, events that will cause emotional distress in Jerusalem, in accordance with his biographies.
-Psalms 22 foretells various things that Messiah would say, things that would happen to him, in accordance with his biographies.

Prophecies from the Bible that were not fulfilled by/in the Bible? I could sooner make a round square. This is an interesting subject if you remain open. Granted, another author of the Bible, in the NT, connects the dots above but the question becomes is the NT account reliable, not whether or not propchecy is fulfilled--because it is if the NT is found reliable. This is also a good, compelling study, for another time. However, I suspect your original question is loaded, a potential procrustean dilemma. A type of "when did you stop beating your wife" -- your response will tell.

Ever read the Qur'an's position on Israel and the Jews?
The ancient Egyptians were not continually attacked, in a short time span, by a coalition of more-numerous/more powerful foes only to triumph on each occassion of defending themselves from international agression, often resoundingly. The Egyptians were not oppressed by virtue of being Egyptian--there is no Egyptian Holocaust. The ancient Egyptians were not forcibly dispersed across the globe, removed from their homeland only to return to their ancentral lands millenia later--as foretold by their Scripture. The fact that Israel exists today is improbable unto laughable. Truth is, the story of the Jews and Israel has no parallel. History atttests to their protection beyond mere chance.
Correct. You'd need corroborating evidence from every realm of study pointing in the same direction in order to deduce the existence of Ra...
Another lengthy topic. For starters, I'll list a few:

-Discovery of the Ebla archive
-Proof of the Hittites found at Bogazkoy, Turkey
-Sir Henry Rawlinson's discovery of the Nabonidus inscriptions
-More recent confirmatory (of the above) find at Hillah, a suburb of Babylon
-Discovery of the Caiaphas family tomb
-Discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls
-The Tel Dan 'House of David' inscription

There's a good deal more but this will suffice as talking points. Note that before these, and many other discoveries, critics used their absence of data as an argument from silence against Biblical credibility--after the discovery, it is just more corroborating evidence...

This is also an interesting study. Doubts are good, means you're contending with the issues. I recommend, first, the "Case for Faith" by Lee Strobel. Check it out. Take a leap of faith, pray about it--wether or not you'd be willing to read this book. Let me know if this interests you, I'd be willing to come alongside you, or any sincere seeker, who wants to read this book and discuss it, object to it, contend with it etc.

Don't worry, Jesus Christ didn't write his his own history. I wouldn't believe it if he did. Are the biographies of Jesus trustworthy? If they are, there are some implications that are life-changing and world-shaping...what do you think?

"Proof" does not exist for Alexander the Great yet I am confident he existed and forged Macedonian/Greek Empire...the evidence is compelling. Likewise, there is a great deal of evidence for the Resurrection. More so than any other event in ancient History. Where to start...what study have you done on the Resurrection?

Right again. I just want to avoid the: all roads lead to God, all religions are essentially the same. Any student of the Bible or the Qur'an knows this cannot be true. When evaluating values, justice, philosophy or history etc. you become a juror, not a lab-tech. At the end of the day, you return a verdict on the major issues, such as the aforementioned above.

Archaeology and prophecy are good starting points on the evidence of Christianity. However, there are many other dimensions of evidence if you're inclined otherwise. No one dimension can prove that the Bible is reliable. No one peice of evidence convicts a man of murder.

The disparity between the Bible and the mystic religions/cults is enormous. This would be another avenue of research. Sounds like a lot of work but if the Bible is true, then the implications deserve as close a look as your time will afford. Do you care to objectively examine? A bit of advice; the prophet Jeremiah proclaimed of God "And you will find me when you seek me with all your heart." If you're done seeking, if you've entrenched yourself, you'll not see the evidence, you'll not seek God and He will not reveal himself to a closed heart. Read Proverbs 2: 3-5; the mind and person of God is promised to the open-minded, fervent seeker. Remain open, remain objective, pursue this as you would pursue your heart's desire and He will not turn you away. You do not know me but I would have you know that I am far from credulous. I agonize over evidence. Know that there is a firm foundation for belief in God and belief in Christ, I would not waste my precious time on less.

Respectfully,
BGiC

Hawkingfan

Why don't you give a scholarly source for the statements you made about Christianity first.

stretch

Sure. Here's a bit from the Catechism of the Catholic Church ... Catholic theology in summary form, with lots of footnotes to other sources.

The relevant passages start at #839

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm#I

Hawkingfan

while your at it: How about showing that Christianity belief in obtaining salvation = Islamic belief in obtaining salvation. Otherwise, see the theological differences at encarta.com under "Islam".

Hawkingfan

I can't seem to find where it says how to be saved.

stretch

Uh ... you claimed that Christianity teaches that Muslims go to hell. My counterclaim was that not all of Christianity does so.


As for salvation, there's a whole section on "The Economy of Salvation" ... try the table of contents, the entire document is online. It takes a while to read ....

Hawkingfan

stretch,
We can have this side conversation. But I'm not going to let this original topic subside. If you wish to debate, please answer the above.

And I would love to go to a Christian forum and ask people to declare that Islam is correct that Jesus is not the son of god but merely a prophet and that you do not need Jesus in order to be saved. I would guess that not too many people would say it.

Hawkingfan

But what scholarly text substantiates that counterclaim?

stretch

I think we're going around in circles here and my confidence in your reading comprehension is waning ... so, I'll just bid adieu on this thread.