Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Did Jesus rise in a physical body or a spiritual one?

Posted by

By Zia H Shah MD

My dear Christians, OK, you have been long indoctrinated in the Christian dogma for generations, so you do not immediately understand the swoon hypothesis, the theory that Jesus went into a swoon on the cross and may have been just resuscitated and not resurrected.

But consider this, if he was resurrected, was he given a physical body or a spiritual body? This should not be difficult to answer, after a life time of professing belief in resurrection!

Apostle Thomas examining chest wounds of Jesus, as he also shows his hand wound: Is it physical body?

If Jesus was given a spiritual body then how could Thomas poke it and feel Jesus’ wounds, why did his fingers not go through the phantom of a spiritual body? If it was a spiritual body why did it eat as mentioned in the New Testament? Additionally, if it was a spiritual body why was Jesus trying to hide and be secretive. All right you understand the issue now; it must have been a physical body.  Not so fast! If it were a physical body, how would we explain that it walked through walls?  Also remember what St. Paul was trying to weave, a story of a spiritual body?

Is it possible that there is no resurrection, the whole story is made up and that is why it is contradictory?  The Trinitarians are preceded by the Jews and the Unitarian Christians and followed by the Muslims. With these three groups jealously guarding pure and unadulterated Monotheism, the Trinitarianism does not stand a chance! Read on and in the words of Sir Francis Bacon, “Read not to contradict … but to weigh and consider.”

Let me now build the details of St. Paul’s preachings about a spiritual body.

Ascension1408 (Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow) by Andrei Rublev (1360-1430) the greatest medieval Russian painter of Orthodox icons and frescoes.
Prof. Mark W. Muesse is Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee. A native of Waco, Texas, he completed his graduate work at Harvard University, where he received a Masters of Theological Studies from the Divinity School and the A.M. and Ph.D. in the Study of Religion from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. He writes about Paul’s understanding of Jesus resurrection, may peace be on him:
The apostle Paul, writing before the gospels were written, called the resurrected form a ‘spiritual body’ and distinguished it from a ‘flesh-and-blood’ body. The idea of a spiritual body is almost oxymoronic, and it is not immediately evident what Paul intended by it. But it is clear that this concept was distinct from the traditional Greek view of the immortality of the soul The early Christians believed that resurrection entailed a raised body, but body that had been transformed in some substantial manner. It was no longer the identical body that belonged to the individual prior to death.
However, we might understand what ‘really’ happened on Easter Sunday, it is significant that Jesus’ followers referred to the event as a ‘resurrection.’ Whether or not there was such a reality as resurrection was a matter of considerable debate during Jesus’ time. The Pharisees and Sadducees argued about it. The issue at stake was whether human beings collectively would be raised from the dead at the end of time. Neither the Pharisees nor the Sadducees seemed to think that ‘resurrection’ was an individual person brought back to life during the normal routine of history. The general resurrection of humanity at Judgment Day would have been the predominant understanding of the concept in Jesus’ time. The fact that the early Christians used the term resurrection suggests that they considered what happened to Jesus as an eschatological event, that is to say, as an occurrence associated with the end of days. The apostle Paul seems to have construed Jesus’ post-­Easter appearances in just this manner. He called the resurrection of Jesus the ‘first fruits of those who have died,’ indicating that god’s raising of Jesus was the inauguration of events that would culminate in the resurrection of all the dead and the final establishment of the kingdom of god. Paul’s view was consistent with the early Christian belief that Jesus would return from heaven shortly and that god’s reign would bring an end to all suffering and want and destroy humanity’s ultimate enemy, death itself. As Paul writes in his first letter to the Corinthians:
What I am saying, brothers and sisters, is this: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I will tell you a mystery! We will not all die [before the kingdom comes], but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When this perishable body puts on imperishability, and this mortal body puts on immortality, then the saying that is written will be fulfilled:
Death has been swallowed up in victory.’
Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?’
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.[1]

In the alleged spiritual resurrection of Jesus, St. Paul is seeing spiritual resurrection of the whole of humanity, all of us.

Most of the paintings on this subject, suggest a spiritual resurrection and link it to the empty tomb:

The painting represents that force of spiritual resurrection has not only moved the stone but shattered the stony entrance!

Let me include two additional pictures or paintings here.  The contrast of the picture with Thomas and other apostles and those of empty tomb, give away the open secret that accounts of resurrection are contradictory!  Picture including Thomas stresses physical resurrection and others highlight spiritual resurrection.  Only reasonable way to resolve this conflict is to agree that it was not a case of resurrection but of resuscitation:

Note the shroud and empty tomb — Light represents spiritual resurrection!

The pictures by helping us focus on the issue make it easy to see the contradiction, which may not be easily apparent to those who have spent a life time obsessing over the person of Jesus, may peace be on him.  Our mind does play strange tricks on us and makes us think that familiar is true and correct.  Even the best minds find it hard to rise above this limitation easily.  But, the hope is that a collection of pictures, videos and other proofs will help my Christian readers to objectively examine the issue.

Again empty tomb with a better bed and light representing, alleged spiritual resurrection!

Revival of a decaying body after three days

The Christian stories about revival were not examined in the light of science in the earlier centuries, but now when you examine them in the light of science and for discussion under this paragraph we will assume that Jesus rose in his physical body, if this be true, very amazing things begin to happen. Hadhrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad explains in his book Christianity a Journey from Fact to Fiction:
The scenario of Jesus’ revival from the dead presents many problems. Some of them have already been discussed in the previous chapter. Now we turn to other elements and complexities.
What we have in view is the nature of the ‘mind’ of Jesus, prior to the Crucifixion and after his revival from the dead. His mind was brought to life again, after a loss of function for three days and nights. The question is, what actually happens to the brain at the time of death? On one point at least there is a consensus among both the Christian and the non-Christian medical experts: if the brain remains dead for more than a few minutes, it is dead and gone forever. As soon as the blood supply ceases, it begins to disintegrate.
If Jesus died during the Crucifixion it can only mean that his heart ceased functioning and stopped supplying blood to his brain, and that his brain died soon after. So his entire life support system must have stopped to operate or he could not have been declared dead. That being so we are faced with a very intriguing problem in relation to the understanding of the life and death of Jesus Christ.
The death of Jesus Christ, as has been demonstrated, would mean a final departure of his astral body, or soul as we may call it, from the physical cage of his human body. If so, his revival would have to mean the return of the same astral body to the same physical body that it had left behind three days earlier. Such a return of the soul would restart the clock of physical life and set it ticking once again. For such a thing to happen, the disintegrated and dead brain cells would have come to life suddenly and the chemical processes of rapid decay would have been reversed entirely. This involves an enormous problem and will ever remain a challenge for the Christian biochemists to resolve. Describing the reversal of the entire chemical processes of decay within the central nervous system is beyond the reach of the farthest stretches of scientist’s imagination. If it ever happened it would be a miracle indeed, defying science and making a mockery of the laws made by God Himself, but a miracle that would still fail to solve the problem at hand.
Such a revival would mean not just the revival of the cells of the central nervous system, but actually their synthesis. Even if the same cells were reconstructed and brought to life exactly as they were before, they would, in fact, be a new set of cells devoid of any previous memory. They would have to be re-manufactured, complete with all the data relevant to the life of Jesus that was wiped out of his brain after the death of his mind.
Life, as we know it, comprises of a consciousness that is filled with information held by billions of neurons within the brain. That information is then subdivided into far more complicated and interrelated bits of computerized information received from each of the five senses. If that data is wiped out, life itself would be wiped out. Therefore, the revival of the brain of Jesus would mean the construction and the manufacture of a new brain computer with a completely new set of software. This complexity also relates to the chemistry of the rest of the body of Jesus Christ. To revive the body, a colossal chemical reconstruction process will have to be put into operation after retrieving all the material lost in the process of decay. With such a great miracle having taken place the question would arise as to who is revived and with what effect? Is it the man in Jesus or is it the god in him? This is why we are emphasizing the importance of understanding the person of Jesus.
For the rest of the story about ascension read the book: Christianity a Journey from Fact to Fiction.
Whereas, St Paul talks about spiritual resurrection in his letters as that is what he experienced on the road to Damascus, the gospels talk about a physical body of Jesus, after crucifixion, with flesh and bones that the disciples could touch.  How did this contradiction arise, between St.  Paul and writers of the gospels?  As Paul did not read any gospels, those had not been written yet, he only had oral traditions and he was talking from his visionary experience, which was intangible.  His letters reveal that he had very little knowledge about the living Jesus, he merely reveals an obsession with the dead Jesus, to satisfy his theory of vicarious atonement.  Ahmad Deedat explains how St Paul got in this trap and eventual contradiction with the description in gospel, in this debate with Prof. Floyd E Clark, between 1.15 and 1.50 hour:

Subsequent Ascension of Jesus

Does this painting of ascension of Jesus represent a historical fact or fiction? Did he ascend with his physical body or leave it behind? As is usually the case the four canonical gospels are at odds with each other on this subject also and the issue of ascension just like all the other details about the final days of Jesus, may peace be on him raises more questions than it answers. Hadhrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad explains in his book Christianity a Journey from Fact to Fiction:

The subject of the Ascension of Jesus Christ is untouched by St. Matthew and St. John in their Gospels. The lack of mention of such an important event leaves one wondering as to why.
The only two synoptic Gospels which mention the Ascension are Mark and Luke. However, recent scientific and scholarly investigations have proved that the accounts contained in both these Gospels are later interpolations. These verses were non-existent in the original texts.
Codex Siniaticus dates from the 4th century and remains the oldest near complete text of the Old and New Testament. It stands witness to the fact that the said verses in both Mark and Luke were not included in the authentic original versions but were certainly added by some scribe on his own initiative much later. In the Codex Siniaticus the Gospel of Mark ends at chapter 16 verse 8. This fact is now acknowledged in some modern Bible editions as well. Also, the Gospel of Luke (24:15) in Codex Siniaticus, does not contain the words ‘Carried up to heaven.’
According to the textual critic C.S.C. Williams, if these omissions in the Codex Siniaticus are correct, there is no reference at all, to the Ascension in the original text of the Gospels.
Even Jehovah’s Witnesses who are some of the most vehement proponents of Jesus’ ‘Sonship’ and his ascent to God the Father, had to admit ultimately that the verses in Mark and Luke are additions without a foundation in the original texts.
What Happened to Jesus’ Body?
A closer critical examination from the point of view of common sense and logic reveals further absurdities inherent in the episodes of the Crucifixion and Ascension as presented by the Christians of today. As far as the question of Jesus’ return to his human body is concerned, enough has been said. We only want to add to the issue of what might have happened to that body when Jesus finally ascended, if he ever did.
When confronted by the question as to what happened to the body of Jesus Christ, it is suggested by some Christians that as he ascended to his heavenly Father his carnal body disintegrated and disappeared in a glow. This raises a fundamental question. If the departure of Jesus from the human body was to result in such an explosive event, why did it not happen at the instant of his first reported death? The only reference we have in the Bible to Jesus’ death is when he was still hanging on the cross and in the words of St. Matthew ‘he gave up the ghost’. Apparently nothing else happened other than a smooth departure of the soul from the body. Are we to assume that he did not die upon the cross after all, because if he had left the body, it should have exploded in a similar fashion even then? Why did it only happen the second time Jesus left his body? Under the circumstances only two avenues are open to proceed further.  That the person of Jesus did not remain eternally confined to the human body after his soul returned to it and that during his ascent he cast away his human body and ascended purely as a spirit of God.
This is neither supported by facts nor is it conceivable because that would lead into a blind alley of believing that Jesus died twice. The first time on the cross and the second time on Ascension.
That he remained confined within the human shell eternally.
This cannot be accepted because it is utterly repulsive and inconsistent with the dignity and majesty of the image of God.
On the other hand, we have a point of view of common sense; ‘It would be a mistake to understand Jesus’ ascension as a sort of ancient space trip, and heaven as a place beyond the sun, moon and the galaxies.’ The truth is neither here nor there. The concoction of such a bizarre story, therefore, could only have been motivated by the insoluble dilemma that the Christians faced during the nascent period of Christianity. When Jesus disappeared from view, naturally the question would have been raised as to what happened to him. The early Christians could not have resolved the quandary by openly professing that as he had never died so there was no question of a body being left behind and that his body had in fact gone along with him during the course of his migration. In this way the problem of the disappearance of the body could have been easily resolved. But this confession was impossible to make. Those who would have dared to admit that Jesus was seen alive and gradually moving away from Judea faced the peril of being condemned by the Roman Law as an accessory to the crime of escape from justice.
To seek refuge in the concoction of a story like the ascent of Jesus to heaven offered a safer option, however bizarre the idea. Yet of course it would involve indulgence in falsehood. We must pay our tribute to the integrity of the early disciples who despite this predicament did not seek refuge in a false statement. All writers of the Gospels chose to remain silent on this issue rather than take refuge behind a smoke screen of misstatements. No doubt they must have suffered the jeering of their adversaries but they chose to suffer in silence. Mysterious silence on the part of those who knew the inside story must have been largely responsible for sowing the seeds of doubt in the minds of Christians of later generations. They must have wondered: why, after the soul of Jesus Christ had departed, was there no mention of his body being left behind? Where had it gone and what had happened to it? Why did the soul of Christ return to the same body if it ever did? These vital but unanswered questions could have given birth to other questions. If revival meant returning to the same body, what must have happened to Jesus Christ after the second term of his imprisonment in the carnal human frame? Did he eternally remain locked up in that body, never to be released again?
For the rest of the story about ascension go to: Christianity a Journey from Fact to Fiction.
When you are ready to understand what really happened to Jesus after a few hours of being on the cross, go to my two other articles:

Jesus did not die on the cross

If Jesus did not die upon the cross: A study in evidence

And what does ascension imply in scientific terms, if you believe in Einstein and E = mc2, read another of my articles, William Lane Craig makes false claims about swoon hypothesis!

References

  1. Prof. Mark W Muesse. Confucius, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad. The Great Courses transcript book, 2010. Page 325-327.
Posted by on April 6, 2012. Filed under Christianity,Islam,Religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

23 Responses to Did Jesus rise in a physical body or a spiritual one?

  1. Rafiq A. Tschannen

    December 22, 2011 at 6:24 am

    Logical thinking would have it that the believe among Muslims that Jesus went physically ‘up to heaven’ (where-ever that could be in a physical form…) definitely was not in existence during the time of the Holy Prophet (peace be on him). The reason I am thinking this is that -- if it was so -- then when the Holy Prophet died (peace be on him) all Muslims would have cried out ‘how can it be that Jesus did not need to die and the Master of all Prophets died?’ We know that this did NOT happen.

    Consequently I feel that this ‘belief’ or rather ‘mis-belief’ crept into the Islamic Ummah may be when Egypt with its plenty of Christians was converted to Islam.

    (No, I do not have any scientific evidence of this, just logical thinking. May be some of our scholars can elaborate with more concrete evidence?)

  2. Zia H. Shah

    December 22, 2011 at 7:27 am

    Brother Rafiq, I think you are exactly right and with a little reading we should be able to document this idea from the writings of the Messiah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani as well.

  3. Pingback: The Pope Benedict’s account of resurrection and the hearsay rule! | The Muslim Times: A Blog to Foster Universal Brotherhood

  4. Pingback: The Pope Benedict’s account of resurrection and the hearsay rule! – Is the West ready for Islam?

  5. Pingback: The Pope Benedict’s account of resurrection and the hearsay rule! – Born Again in Islam

  6. Pingback: William Lane Craig makes false claims about swoon hypothesis! | The Muslim Times: A Blog to Foster Universal Brotherhood

  7. Zia H. Shah

    April 4, 2012 at 9:31 am

    Resurrection is based on the eye-witness’ accounts but that is based on forgery
    Half of New Testament forged, Bible scholar says:

    By John Blake, CNN

    A frail man sits in chains inside a dank, cold prison cell. He has escaped death before but now realizes that his execution is drawing near.

    “I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come,” the man –the Apostle Paul -- says in the Bible’s 2 Timothy. “I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith.”

    The passage is one of the most dramatic scenes in the New Testament. Paul, the most prolific New Testament author, is saying goodbye from a Roman prison cell before being beheaded. His goodbye veers from loneliness to defiance and, finally, to joy.

    There’s one just one problem -- Paul didn’t write those words. In fact, virtually half the New Testament was written by impostors taking on the names of apostles like Paul. At least according to Bart D. Ehrman, a renowned biblical scholar, who makes the charges in his new book “Forged.”

    “There were a lot of people in the ancient world who thought that lying could serve a greater good,” says Ehrman, an expert on ancient biblical manuscripts.In “Forged,” Ehrman claims that:

    * At least 11 of the 27 New Testament books are forgeries.

    * The New Testament books attributed to Jesus’ disciples could not have been written by them because they were illiterate.

    * Many of the New Testament’s forgeries were manufactured by early Christian leaders trying to settle theological feuds.

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/half-of-new-testament-forged-bible-scholar-says/?

  8. Zia H. Shah

    April 4, 2012 at 9:32 am

    The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
    Christian apologists try to use the label of ‘facts,’ to create credibility for the hearsay evidence that they present for resurrection. But, the facts of one apologist differ in some ways from the facts of another apologist and in this comparison we can see that all the evidence mounts to no more than hearsay.

    The first apologist that I want to bring here as a witness is Michael Licona. He debated Prof. Bart Ehrman and was trying to prove the historic validity of resurrection, he had the first opening statement. He suggested three (so called) facts to make the sum total of his thesis:

    1. Jesus’ death by crucifixion.
    2. Sighting of Jesus by the Apostles after Crucifixion.
    3. Sighting by Paul.

    It turned out that the first fact was a red herring and had no relevance to the debate, as Ehrman simply mentioned that Jesus did not have to be crucified but could have been drowned or died of cholera and could have been raised from the dead. So the first fact goes away fairly quickly and the other two facts are in fact only one fact as these imply witnessing by certain people including Paul. So much for the three facts of Licona. We will return to his only remaining fact some other time but let us move to the facts of William Lane Craig and address one of his facts in this comment. He makes a big deal out of the so called fact of the empty tomb and its relevance to resurrection. His fact is easily negated by a little quote from the chief apologist, Pope Benedict XVI:

    “Jesus traveled the path of death right to the bitter and seemingly hopeless end in the tomb. Jesus’ tomb was evidently known. And here the question naturally arises: Did he remain in the tomb? Or was it empty after he had risen?

    In modern theology this question has been extensively debated. Most commentators come to the conclusion that an empty tomb would not be enough to prove the Resurrection. If the tomb were indeed empty, there could be some other explanation for it. On this basis, the commentators conclude that the question of the empty tomb is immaterial and can therefore be ignored, which tends also to mean that it probably was not empty anyway, so at least a dispute with modern science over the possibility of bodily resurrection can be avoided. But at the basis of all this lies a distorted way of posing the question.

    Naturally, the empty tomb as such does not prove the Resurrection. Mary Magdalene, in John’s account, found it empty and assumed that someone must have taken Jesus’ body away. The empty tomb is no proof of the Resurrection, that much is undeniable. Conversely, though, one might ask: Is the Resurrection compatible with the body remaining in the tomb? Can Jesus be risen if he is still lying in the tomb? What kind of resurrection would that be? Today, notions of resurrection have been developed for which the fate of the corpse is inconsequential. Yet the content of the Resurrection becomes so vague in the process that one must ask with what kind of reality we are dealing in this form of Christianity.

    Be that as it may: Thomas Soding, Ulrich Wilckens, and others rightly point out that in Jerusalem at the time, the proclamation of the Resurrection would have been completely impossible if anyone had been able to point to a body lying in the tomb. To this extent, for the sake of posing the question correctly, we have to say that the empty tomb as such, while it cannot prove the Resurrection, is nevertheless a necessary condition for Resurrection faith, which was specifically concerned with the body and, consequently, with the whole of the person.”

    So, the punch line is that the empty tomb does not prove resurrection hypothesis but may be necessary for considering such a hypothesis.

    Ref: Pope Benedict XVI. Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem To The Resurrection. Ignatius Press, 2011. Pages 253-254.

  9. Zia H. Shah

    April 4, 2012 at 9:35 am

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but none provided by the Pope
    The scientific case against resurrection is pretty straightforward: once dead you stay dead — that’s just the way it works. Coming back to life after having been dead (I mean really dead) would constitute a violation of natural law — a miracle — and miracles just don’t happen. Fair enough. But in his recent book on the last days of Jesus (Jesus of Nazareth Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem to the Resurrection), Joseph Ratzinger (aka Pope Benedict XVI) argues that reckoning Resurrection as resuscitation of a corpse is to misunderstand its true significance. Jesus’ Resurrection, he contends, was an utterly singular event, straining the very limits of human understanding:

    “Anyone approaching the Resurrection accounts in the belief that he knows what rising from the dead means will inevitably misunderstand those accounts and will then dismiss them as meaningless” (p. 243).

    In fact, if Jesus’ Resurrection were “merely” coming back to life in any way that we might comprehend, then it would be of little significance.

    “Now it must be acknowledged that if in Jesus’ Resurrection we were dealing simply with the miracle of a resuscitated corpse, it would ultimately be of no concern to us” (p. 243).

    So what then does Resurrection mean? For Benedict it represents a new dimension of reality breaking through into human experience. It is not a violation of the old; it is the manifestation of something new.

    “Jesus had not returned to a normal human life in this world like Lazarus and the others whom Jesus raised from the dead. He has entered upon a different life, a new life — he has entered the vast breadth of God himself…” (p. 244).

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-j-rossano/does-resurrection-contrad_b_848577.html

    In short Pope’s writing is a hotch potch of details to appeal to the naive and already converted and for non-Christians has little to offer, nothing more than myths or legends of old polytheistic societies!

    The good news, however, is that the Pope at least is trying to explain the swoon hypothesis, as in the past they would just adamantly deny it and just insist on their paradigm, however irrational!

  10. Zia H. Shah

    April 4, 2012 at 10:04 am

    Did Jesus Rise From The Dead -- Bart Ehrman Vs William Lane Craig?

  11. MNA KHAN

    April 4, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    One Strong Point of View is that,In fact Jesus was Resuscitated during the darkness of storm by its companions hiding there in the near bushes around.After He saved and Treated at a secret place so that the enemies can not locate him.Then He migrated.When after darkness of storm became clear and no dead body was found. Then a big question arose WHERE DID JESUS GO? It was necessary for His companions to say that he is gone to God and will come back when God will send him back.
    This was the compulsion to keep his migration a secret forever so that enemies do not chase him.
    In the same vein, in Sikhism, under similar compulsions, some are keeping Baba Grunanak Alive. Baba Guru Nanak, the Founder of Sikh Religion in India was a holy Person and his believers were both Hindus and Muslims, as He was a Sufi. Now after his death a serious issue arises as Hindus claim the Baba was a Hindu. So, his dead body should be burnt as Hindus do. But the Muslims believers claimed that Baba was a true Muslim as his dress had verses from the Holy Quran stitched on it. The Baba at the time of death was a guest of a Muslim believer, who gave suggestion that let every body go to there home and keep the body for night, and Pray to God of Baba so that He guides us what burial option should be opted.
    As body was in the house of a Muslim believer, so he along with other Muslim brothers decided to bury the body exactly according to the Muslims tradition, to save dead body of Baba to be burned by his Hindu believers.
    But, here arises the compulsion this time, if grave was revealed, the body of Baba will be burned by his Hindu believers so it was Said that BABA HAS GONE TO GOD
    and is alive in sky and will come back. So It Was the under compulsion OF THE TIME that RESURRECTED both Jesus and Baba Guru Nanak and their believers are looking towards sky and waiting, waiting and waiting. …

  12. O J DEEN

    April 5, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    Did Jesus (as) physically Ascend to Allah ???

    Subject: Did Jesus (as) physically Ascend to Allah?

    http://www.youtube.com/daielallah#p/u/5/BJBvN5coL7A

  13. Robert Adams

    April 5, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    The more I read The Muslim Times, the more I find it not to be one of understanding and acceptance of other faiths and those the adhere to those faiths, but one that endeavors to disprove, or attempt to convince others e.g. Christians, that what they believe is wrong and attempts to steer them to Islam. This recent emphasis, particularly during this holy Christian time, is telling of the true purpose of the site and I find to be inconsiderate. It’s Muslim evangelism. I’m not saying that is wrong, mind you, if it’s readily apparent and stated as its intent upfront. What I am saying that it was my initial impression that the site was to promote peace, understanding and acceptance of other faiths. Stating what you believe is fine, but to make your case by saying others are wrong is not acceptance.

  14. Rafiq A. Tschannen

    April 5, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    Dear Robert Adams, we highly respect all believers in any religion, as we believe that all religions come from the same Creator. But, yes, as the last religion we believe that Islam is the final revealed religion.

    As increasingly the conflict is between ‘believers’ and ‘non-believers’ in any religion we hope to maintain the best possible relations with you all!!!

  15. Zia H. Shah

    April 5, 2012 at 3:13 pm

    Dear Robert Adams

    The central idea of the Muslim Times is friendly communication. Mutual respect does not mean that all claims to truth are equally valid and that we have to see eye to eye all the time. But, we do respect Christians’ beliefs and their right to uphold these and preach the same in every corner of the world. However, where ever we differ with them, we like to point out our reasons politely.

    As long as we coin our differences in friendly and reasonable terminology, I do not see a reason to be upset.

    Another way of looking at dialogue would be that if indeed Christian beliefs are perfectly true and valid, you should find our commentary, simply silly and irrelevant and not something to be offended by.

    Best Regards.

  16. Erin LaPorte

    April 5, 2012 at 6:31 pm

    Well -- I’m a Christian and I’m not only NOT offended, but like to see Muslims debate about Jesus (Isa). As a Christian I DO believe in the divinity of Jesus and His rising from the dead.

    I respect your views about Jesus and find them interesting, even during Easter. I have read parts of the Koran and am open to learning about other faiths in the name of peaceful understanding. I don’t find your views “silly and stupid” at all and I’m interested in what Muslims have to say on other topics.

  17. Zia H. Shah

    April 5, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    Thank you Erin for your openness to a friendly dialogue.

    Please consider reading some of the articles especially meant for the Christians in our website, Islam for the West. Feel free to comment and ask questions.

    Best Regards!

  18. Amtul Q Farhat

    April 6, 2012 at 8:02 am

    @ MNA Khan:

    I feel the same situation operates in the disappearance of Mohammad Al Mahdi the 12th Imam of Shiites who is believed to be with God and will return at a later time. Imam AlMahdi was born in such circumstance that even his birth was kept in utmost secrecy. In the middle of very hostile opponents he became Imam at the age of 5 and soon after disappeared. Imam Moahammad Al Mahdi is different from Jesus. In fact Jesus is believed to be a follower of Imam AlMahdi in later days.

  19. MNA KHAN

    April 7, 2012 at 5:41 am

    What I observed Muslim Times is to provide us a forum to discuss politely and openly different matters.Every positive mind want to know THE TRUTH.If We all discuss any matter with open mind then We will reach on a same point of view.I mean when We all searching one thing that is nothing but THE TRUTH.Then if We all discuss with open mind then We can find THE TRUTH.The main point is that if we are on a mission of finding TRUTH then we should try to find THE TRUTH.We should also own THE TRUTH where ever we find it.SO my dear human-being let us find THE TRUTH by positive and polite discussions to make our lives PURE and TRUE.
    At last I thanks to The Muslim Times for providing us ( all Human-beings)a forum to find THE TRUTH. THANKS.

  20. MNA KHAN

    April 7, 2012 at 9:25 am

    Amtul Q Farhat Sahiba, most sects of Mulims believe that Immam Al-Mehdi was due to come in the Umah and as you said in the later days.The question is are these later days was identified or specified by the Ahadees or Mujad-E-Dins of Umah on diffrent times.Answer is Yes.The time was agreed as the start of 14th Islamic Century ( Choudhvien Sadi )The only Holly Muslim Person ( With in Umah )claimed at the fixed time ,The awaited Immam Al-Mehdi who presented all proofs in his favor by Quran and Ahadees.Although in the start only few peoples entered in his Organization(Jammat)but He told loudly that no one will come after him and He is that awaited Al-Mehdi and Messiah-E-Maud according to Hadees ( Lall Messiah Illa Mahdi ). The passed 130 years witnessed his claim that no body came with required proofs after him and according to his saying his organization( Jammat ) became so strong and spread in Hundreds of Millions by the help of God ( Allah-Al-Mighty)that sun never set on Jammat-E-Ahmadiyya The true Islam having a system ( Khilafat Alla-Minhaj-E-Nabwa ). In this way all the Ahadees about Imam Al-Mahdi and Messiah proved true. It means saying of Muhammad about Immam Al-Mehdi and Messiah-E-Muhammadi was exactly true.

    All other stories about Immam Ghaib or not but Ghaib, not proved by the time and facts.

  21. Pingback: God of Islam: God of Nature and the Creator of our Universe | The Muslim Times

  22. Pingback: God of Islam: God of Nature and the Creator of our Universe | The Muslim Times

  23. Pingback: God of Islam: God of Nature and the Creator of our Universe – For Christians, To be Born Again in Islam!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>