Since it is quite evident that Islam is a Judaizing-Noahide religion that seeks to perpetuate the Old Testament laws, not only from its Talmudic doctrines but also its ancient history, it is now time to discuss the so-called "Christian" character of the Qur'an which will prove the same. A few New Testament people are mentioned in the Qur'an, namely 'Jesus', his mother Mary, her father 'Joachim', the 'Apostles', 'John' (the Baptist), and his father Zechariah. Also, seemingly Christian doctrines are mentioned, such as the prophethood of Jesus, the Virgin Birth, and some weird kind of "Trinity" which includes Jesus' "mother". But what does this have to do with Christianity?
Christians are allegedly mentioned in the Qur'an as "People of the Book" alongside Jews and Sabians. The fact of the matter is, however, Christians are not mentioned by name in the Qur'an at all, not even once. The word falsely translated as "Christian(s)" is نصراني (naṣrāniyy)/نصارى (naṣārā) whereas the Arabic word for Christians is مسيحي(ين) (masīḥiyy/īn). The word "nasara" is more accurately translated as "Nazarenes", and this is the case in a select few translations of the Qur'an. But traditional Christians did not refer to themselves as Nazarenes, least of all when the Qur'an was written. According to the
Wikipedia: "Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 220, Against Marcion, 4:8) records that the Jews called Christians "Nazarenes" from Jesus being a man of Nazareth... Jerome too records that, in the synagogues, the word "Nazarenes" was used to describe Christians." This makes sense given that that Jews don't believe Jesus is the Christ (Messiah) and avoid using that name except as a curse, but then why would Muslims use it to mean Christians?
The Qur'an essentially employed a Hebraic word that is still used by Jews to refer to Christians, so does that mean that "nasara" is actually Christians? No: there was also a heretical Judaizing sect known to Christian writers as Nazarenes, and when we understand that they are who the Qur'an is actually referring to, then its ambiguous/confusing doctrines and rhetorical hogwash will become much clearer.
We see in this passage from the same article that the Nazarenes were kind of like "Messianic" Jews and had identical beliefs as Muslims: that they adhered to the Law of Moses, used only one Gospel (which Muslims call the Injeel and claim is now lost), rejected the concept of the Son of God but accepted the Virgin Birth. Moreover, in the article on the so-called "Gospel of the Hebrews" (which is the same as the hypothetical "Gospel of the Nazarenes") we read the following:
The significance of this is two-fold: on the one hand it is in-line with the Islamic rhetoric that promotes St. James the Just and the Jerusalem Church as a parallel "Jewish" sect vis-a-vis "Pauline Christanity". And on the other hand, it explains the Quranic verse (5:116) wherein 'Jesus' is
accused by Allah of telling people to "Take me and my mother as their gods besides God", since Muslims think by "my mother" it is referring to the Virgin Mary, when it is really a Nazarene accusation against Christians of taking Son of God, and his "mother" the Holy Spirit as gods beside God the Father. And to drive the point home from Quranic exegesis, we read read in 5:86 the following:
The Qur'an claims that those nearest in affection to the believers (Muslims) are those who say "We are Christians", but how can that be that case when immediately preceding that, Christians are meant by "those who associate other with Allah" and are said to be "the most intense in animosity towards the believers"? Again, this contradiction is explained by the simple fact that the word translated as "Christians" is "nasara" which does not refer to traditional Christians but to the Nazarene heretics, which the Qur'an has to remind people have their own priests and monks.
It's enough to use the Qur'an itself and its--at best--disingenuous translations to expose the fickle argumentation of Muslims, but my follow-up will show from the Hadith the inescapable fact that the "Christian" substratum of the Qur'an originates from the cultural milieu of the Nazarenes.
TL;DR: The word "Christian(s)" in the Qur'an is properly translated as "Nazarene(s)" and refers not to Christians proper but a heretical sect of anti-trinitarian Messianic Jews from whom the Muslims got their theology.
1) the protestants accuse the catholics of worshipping Mary as 'the mother of God' and that is what the Quran alluded to.
nowhere did it say that 'this is the christian trinity'
the only thing the Quran said on the trinity was 'DON'T SAY GOD IS THREE' because such a statement doesn't have any root in the bible. Jesus never once used the word 'three' in any part of the Gospel accounts.
the underlying 'truth' within the trinity is not what the christians have understood or projected
the truth is that God is Immanent on the macrocosmic level (which is the eternal logos) and the micricosmic level (which is via the holy spirit). Yet christians reduced the macrocosmic to Jesus only. The Logos incarnated in Jesus, was made flesh in him, but it isnt limited to Jesus, the logos is ALL things in the pre-causal state. Logos is basically infinity and causation is the beginning.
2)
according to you, there's a whole different sect/religion called the Nazarenes, obv you also accept that the jews referred to the original christians as 'nazarenes' eg
Acts 24
5 “We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect
as for everything else you wrote in the nazarenes, it's a load of bollocks.
the nazarenes were christian, simple.
the only other group identified as nazarenes were a pre-christianity group, they didnt even exist by the 7th century for you to think muslims took ideas off them.
guess what? the real name of hinduism is Sanatan Dharma, but today they mostly call themselves hindu.
when we use the word 'hindu' we know who it refers to and they have no issue with it.
the 'nasara' are the christians..and there's nothing else to it.
3)
you wrote
The Qur'an claims that those nearest in affection to the believers (Muslims) are those who say "We are Christians", but how can that be that case when immediately preceding that, Christians are meant by "those who associate other with Allah" and are said to be "the most intense in animosity towards the believers"
Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to be) the Jews and those who are polytheists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those who believe (to be) those who say: We are christians; this is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly.
(سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #82)
let me break this down for you
unlike 99% of muslims, ill stick my neck out and say that the trinitarian doctrine whilst false, is based around an actual truth
as i said, God is Trancendent but is Immanent on the Macrocosmic and Microcosmic levels
the Logos and the Holy Spirit.
the problem is that the actual trinitarian doctrine via the creed claims the Son and Holy Spirit are co-equal in Godhead together and with the Father. THIS is totally false because we know Jesus even said the Holy spirit is not greater than the Son.
We know the Son doesnt even know when the last hour is, nor can he do anything on his own.
The Logos/Son is akin to a prism revealing the attributes of God out of which the process of causation takes place...
the Logos on it's own is eternal expression, but it doesn't have the power on it's own.
look at it this way
is there anything you can ever do that God doesn't know?
so God has known ALL things eternally. By extention since the existence of things is through God's knowledge, all things are eternal. Yet all things arent God.
'all things' is just summed up as the Logos/Image of God/Son etc. in ancient mythologies it was likened to the 'primordial ocean' and the individual spirits as 'drops'.
Whatever the case is, the underlying trintry as ive explained/understood it, referring to God and His Immanence on 2 levels..is summed up by the words
Bismillah IrRahman IrRaheem
besides if you really read up on the concept of Immanence on wiki, it says this
According to Christian theology, the transcendent God, who cannot be approached or seen in essence or being, becomes immanent primarily in the God-man Jesus the Christ, who is the incarnate Second Person of the Trinity. In Byzantine Rite theology the immanence of God is expressed as the hypostases or energies of God, who in his essence is incomprehensible and transcendent. In Catholic theology, Christ and the Holy Spirit immanently reveal themselves; God the Father only reveals himself immanently vicariously through the Son and Spirit, and the divine nature, the Godhead is wholly transcendent and unable to be comprehended.
the above, is entirely acceptable to me.
since God/The Father alone is Trancendent and the other 2 are expressions revealing God's Immanence, but not to be confused as 'God' in the true sense.
YET does the ave christian agree with me? hell no
it is 'UNLESS YOU WORSHIP JESUS, YOU CAN NEVER BE ACCEPTED, JESUS JESUS JESUS LORD GOD' etc
it is a disgusting divergence that's based entirely around ego worship because they just cannot accept that the muslims are right on this matter, so they cling onto a misinterpretation and try convincing themselves it's the actual truth.
simple, if Jesus doesnt know when the last hour is..he isnt God./ if Jesus can't do any of the miracles on his own but needs the Father to do them through him, then he isn't God.
the above quote makes perfect sense and is consistent with the NT..and even i agree with it...so what's the problem? islams problem is with the language of Christianity and it's repercussions...
prime example
Jesus himself acknowledged Psalm 110 to the jews eg that 'david referred to me as lord'
right?
but in psalm 110, 'lord' is adoni, and God is 'adonai'
so obv Jesus is 'lord' but not God. YET the christians deliberately capitalise the L, they write 'The Lord Jesus' when in reality is is 'lord Jesus'
example Romans 1:7
here's the jewish version
7 To all who are in Rome, ahuvei Hashem (beloved ones of G-d), summoned by Hashem’s kri’ah (calling) to be kadoshim (holy ones)‖unmerited Chen v’Chesed Hashem and Shalom Hashem from Elohim Avinu and Rebbe, Melech HaMoshiach Yehoshua
Adoneinu.
this is referring to the lesser 'lord'..
whereas Adonai is interchangeable with 'Hashem' 'YHWH'
the other issue is that if you do consider Jesus to be 'fully God' then a logical conclusion is that Mary is indeed the 'mother of God'
these type of small nuances within christianity are problems that did arise..and islam highlighted them very brielfly.
instead of moaning about islam's view of christianity, you should accept that the flaws are of your own making. christianity is problematic because the truth is the original language came out of a judeo-hellenised context and yet the gentiles adopted terms with zero understanding of them.
when the ave european or african throughout the last 2000 yrs was reading 'son of God' they were taking that way too literally and imagining baby Jesus.
that's just a fact.
christianity came out of advanced philosophical themes...and it wasnt for the ave layman to understand. which is why it became necessary for islam to simplify it all.
4)
you think islam is just 'returning people to the mosaic law system'
i like how you find a way to insult the law system, as if it didnt come from God.
Paul argued that the original christians were like the patriarchs. righteous by faith..
great..
YET God saw fit to later give the israelites the law. You're attacking islam for 'going backwards' basically and yet God did that to the israelites...
but we also learn through the NT that God only gave the laws of Moses to the israelites after they had lost said 'faith' in egypt.
so it makes perfect sense that the christians entered into serious errors through the false creed via Rome..
Paul argued that the law wasnt designed to conceal sin but to reveal it, so the depths of sin can be known..
all in order to reveal God's Grace.
So Jesus came to complete the law of Moses..and thus reveal God's Grace.
nice idea...that..
but how much greater is said faith if it is complete a law system on the global scale rather than just local? does that not make Jesus even greater?
it makes sense that a prophet with laws would come from gentiles similar to Moses in a time when the christians had lost the way...
it's the same pattern as before but this time gentiles are included in it.
YET even then you are ignorant of islam because in islam, we are taught that there are 3 levels of faith
Iman (belief)
Islam (perfect submission to the Will of Allah)
Ihsan (worshipping Allah 'as if you see Him').
Ihsan isnt going to be understood by some of the muslim clowns on here either. Ihsan connects with the 'sonship' idea within christianity. Islam is from the micricosmic level and ihsan is from the macrocosmic level.
This is something the sufis followed heavily...
it isnt a case of generically just imagining God in the mind...it is like Jesus said
'if your eye is single your whole body shall be full of light'
it's about eliminating all 'else than God' out of your mind until a person can only see the act of God in all things. in that state a person becomes 'transparent' and even his/her acts are really the act of God.
Ihsan is the highest stage of faith.
whereas circumcision and islam is about the struggle of the nafs.
the cruxifixion, martydom and ihsan are about the death of the nafs entirely.
if you knew islam in reality you'd know it is the complete religion. you're judging it without real familiarity. it caters to people on different levels.
And We ordained for them therein a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution. But whoever gives [up his right as] charity, it is an expiation for him. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the wrongdoers.
(سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #45)
the former is the system of islam
the latter is the system of ihsan
