If I am wrong, then so be it.
Fair enough. But if you are wrong about Islam, and it's certainly an open question, then it's also an open question as to whether or not President Bush is wrong about Islam, at the very least. Therefore, the question asked of him today at the press conference in the UK is certainly fair game. But the Bible is a WHOLE document which gives the history of God and Christ. If you can say that accepting Christ's sacrifice is enough, then why can't Muslims also choose which parts of the Koran to believe and which parts to dismiss?
Because it's not on the authority of Christians that we recognize that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient, it's intrinsic to the Gospel. The revelation of the New Testament is not a dismissal of the Old Testament, but a completion of it. Jews don't believe Christ is the son of God. Are they wrong also?
Yes, in their understanding of the Jesus the Messiah. However, Jews do believe in the same God as do Christians. Jews follow the Old Testament which is about 5/6 of the Bible as a whole. As a Christians, we understand that the Jews follow a true, though incomplete revelation. Muslims follow a heresy. Yes, and??? Written as they interpret it. Like the Bible, the Koran has been written and interpreted differently over thousands of years. If it meant the same to all Muslims, then you would see all Muslims being terrorists.
No, the Bible is not like the Koran in this way. There are no "Satanic Verses" of the Bible that had to be excised. Another poster recommended "Evidence that Demands a Verdict," by Josh McDowell. While I haven't read it myself, I'm familiar with McDowell, and with the scholarship on which he relies. Folks can choose to believe or disbelieve the Bible, but it's literary integrity is not in serious question, either for the Old or New Testaments. The "Jesus Seminar" and German Criticism are based entirely on specualtive and unfounded literary theory. There is not a shred of archaeological or documentary evidence to support their conclusions. If one would go by what you just said, then there can be only one true religion based on the Bible. So what is it? Christianity? Judism? Factions of Christianity??? Every single one of them believe something different. Which one is right? And which Bible version is right? King James, NIV?
This is a false premise which leads to much schism. Christians are saved by grace through faith and salvation. Doctrinal differences are exactly that, and we are saved by faith, not by doctrine. A small (and controversial) minority of Jews operate under the covenant of grace. Most still operate under the old covenant of works. The final judgement of their souls I leave to God; it's a mystery to me. I do know that on Judgement Day, every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. Why not ask the peaceful Muslims here in the US?
Why would I, when they have dispensation to lie to me? I watch their actions, I listen to what they say and don't say, I observe the history of Islam in every nation where their numbers have placed them in a majority. Their track record of pluralism is dismal. What if modern/moderate Muslims believe the militants are wrong and are heretics to Islam? Isn't it entirely possible that the radical element of Islam is causing a secular movement within Islam?
Sure. There's a quip I've read: "The only good Muslim is a bad Muslim." The underlying problem, however, rests with the nature of Mohammed. He was a prophet of jihad and terror. In religions we observe the periodic phenomenon of revival, and returns to fundamentals. The fundament of Islam is Mohammed. How can terror and jihad be extricated from Islam without also removing Mohammed? Yet how can Islam remain Islam without Mohammed?
|
