How can a good God allow suffering

@HabibUrrehman,

HabibUrrehman wrote:

No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified.

In conclusion Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that will take place. Notice how the verses are speaking of future events that will take place. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt.

The Bible is in clear contradiction with itself regarding Jesus’ alleged crucifixion and in everything else that it essentially talks about. It cannot be trusted nor taken very seriously to base a serious faith on. At best, one would only be speculating when he tries to use the Bible to prove anything. Islam is the only Religion, which is by the way also the Only True and uncorrupt Divine Religion remaining today, that confirms the Truth in the Bible and removes the falsehood from it.

If this is not enough, I can go in futher details and quote many more passages. But I think this is enough for someone who believes Bible is the word of God, if that was the case there would have been no clear contradictions in the fundamental concepts.

Again I appologize if this hurt your feelings but it is the truth whether you believe it or deny it and I am only trying to help you.

It doesn't hurt my feeling. On the contrary, I'm elated that you seem to be sincere regarding brotherly love.

What it sounds like you mean to say is that you think I should just dismiss Matthew 27, quoted above, and other NT passages; but I'm afraid I can't do that because, even if the material/historical events they describe turn out to be embellished to convey a spiritual truth, it is the spiritual truth that is of primary importance.

Quote:

John 3

3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.[c] 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You[d] must be born again.’ 8 The wind[e] blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

You are also implying that if someone is harmed/crucified, that means they have not been protected by God. This contradicts what we believe as Christians, which is that sinners can be reborn from sin and reform/ascend in their salvation. Sin is part of this world and even the righteous suffer because of it.

1 Reply

@HabibUrrehman,

HabibUrrehman wrote:

Imagine a country having 3 presidents? Do you think we will have peace and harmony? Yes we have many religions who believe in more than one gods, this alone tell us that they are not the true religions.

In true submission to God, everyone would be in agreement/harmony, so a country could have as many presidents as people and they would all be in agreement/harmony with God's will.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Is it not interesting that Bible itself denies crucifixion and obviously you also have passages to support what you believe. Is not that a clear contradiction? Is not that a clear proof that the Bible is not the word of God?

Quote:

Jesus said, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” [Matthew 12:39-40 KJV]

This verse in Matthew 12:39 does not support the Christian’s weak interpretation suggesting that Jesus died and was resurrected three days later. Logical thinking must be applied here without prejudice.

3 DAYS AND 3 NIGHTS?

According to the NT of the Bible, Whoever was crucified, was executed on Friday at about the 6th hour (Mark 14:12-17 & 15:23) and taken down later that evening at about the 9th hour (Mark 15:34 & Matthew 27:51-52) because the Jews did not want to break the Sabbath. Then very early on Sunday morning when some women came to the tomb to anoint the body with spices, the body was mysteriously gone! So from Friday to Saturday is 1 full day, and from Saturday to early Sunday morning is a half a day. The total is 1 and a half days, equivalent to roughly 36 hours not a full 72 hours that would equal 3 whole days, so this prophesy failed…

How do you explain that?

Jesus (pbuh) made it very clear that he will not die because his condition will be like Jonah’s, meaning ALIVE!

Second point is that the heart of the earth is not suggesting that he was or would be buried underground as Christians claim is meant by this part. According to Christians and the scriptures, Jesus’ body was placed above ground in a tomb so therefore this doesn’t line up with the prophecy.

Last point is that the "heart of the earth” is ironically the center of the earth. Geographically the center of the earth is Mekkah where the previous prophets of God paid their homage to the House that Abraham built which is known as the Kab’ba. So by the overwhelming evidences, Jesus was raised up to Almighty God alive and wasn’t crucified as Christians believe he was…it’s really just that simple!

Note that the Kab’ba is the very same place where millions of Muslims visit every year for Hajj (pilgrimage), so it is highly probable that Jesus himself fulfilled his pilgrimage too!

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Practically impossible especially with the free will. And we know how the greed and desire for power works.

0 Replies

@HabibUrrehman,

HabibUrrehman wrote:

Is it not interesting that Bible itself denies crucifixion and obviously you also have passages to support what you believe. Is not that a clear contradiction? Is not that a clear proof that the Bible is not the word of God?

The true word of God is Truth itself. The Bible and anything else that helps people reach Truth is good. If you are implying that the Bible is bad because it holds potential to lead people away from Truth, then you would have to say the same about the Quran or any other book, because sin is always a latent potential in human nature, even when humans are following what they understand as holy scripture.

I believe the story of the crucifixion advances spiritual truths and it would be a sin to attempt to edit the Bible to remove the crucifixion because someone claims that there is contradiction in it.

Quote:

Jesus said, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” [Matthew 12:39-40 KJV]

This verse in Matthew 12:39 does not support the Christian’s weak interpretation suggesting that Jesus died and was resurrected three days later. Logical thinking must be applied here without prejudice.

3 DAYS AND 3 NIGHTS?

According to the NT of the Bible, Whoever was crucified, was executed on Friday at about the 6th hour (Mark 14:12-17 & 15:23) and taken down later that evening at about the 9th hour (Mark 15:34 & Matthew 27:51-52) because the Jews did not want to break the Sabbath. Then very early on Sunday morning when some women came to the tomb to anoint the body with spices, the body was mysteriously gone! So from Friday to Saturday is 1 full day, and from Saturday to early Sunday morning is a half a day. The total is 1 and a half days, equivalent to roughly 36 hours not a full 72 hours that would equal 3 whole days, so this prophesy failed…

How do you explain that?[/quote]
I don't have to explain it, because it's the deeper spiritual Truth that's important. I have to deal with the same kinds of criticisms from atheists who want to claim that Moses was an idiot for saying the Earth was created in six days. They don't understand the deeper meaning and instead choose to focus on silly details because they want to be in opposition/debate instead of studying the deeper Truths conveyed.

Quote:

Jesus (pbuh) made it very clear that he will not die because his condition will be like Jonah’s, meaning ALIVE!

Jesus preached eternal life and He is resurrected/risen. It seems all you are arguing is a certain understanding you hold about the relationship between life and death.

I have to go now. Thank you for your devotion to Truth.

1 Reply

@HabibUrrehman,

Quote:

The nature of God shall not change and He should be eternal.

Malachi 4:1 (from memory, though that was over 3 decades ago). It's an interesting verse as relates to the Bible. There's not really anything to say he can't show different aspects of himself for different purposes, similar to the Islamic concept of abrogation, where he revealed different attitudes as the strength of the Muslim faithful grew.

So in relation to the change in the bible - one could argue, in a violent and harsh world, the people of God were not ready for a peaceful, loving way of being (which essentially would require protectors). And there was a wait for civilisation to reach a certain stage of development before it could be revealed. That's contradictory to the Quran, but it just shows you can argue many perspectives after the fact (if you start with an end point).

3 Replies

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

So in relation to the change in the bible - one could argue, in a violent and harsh world, the people of God were not ready for a peaceful, loving way of being (which essentially would require protectors). And there was a wait for civilisation to reach a certain stage of development before it could be revealed.

Inner conflict is an immutable aspect of human existence. We are always simultaneously pulled in different directions (like in the cartoons with the angel and devil arguing in characters' consciences). There is, therefore, no possibility for absolute peace except to the extent we learn how to accept forgiveness from God for our inherently sinful nature. We can aspire to love God enough to put effort into honoring our salvation from sin by confessing/repenting and seeking deliverance from it, but that is the ultimate form of peace we have access to, because we cannot divorce ourselves from sin completely, as a fundamental aspect of this world and our existence in it.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

I think you may have utterly missed the point of my post.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

The true word of God is Truth itself. The Bible and anything else that helps people reach Truth is good. If you are implying that the Bible is bad because it holds potential to lead people away from Truth, then you would have to say the same about the Quran or any other book, because sin is always a latent potential in human nature, even when humans are following what they understand as holy scripture.

That's more of an answer of a diplomat (politician) who never directly addresses the question. Deep down who know that there are contradiction in Bible and you also know that Bible is not 100% truth, yet you want to hold on to a book compiled by people and they attribute those lies to God?

Yes word of God is the only truth and that's why I ask you to read Quran. There are no contradictions in Quran which is a proof that it is the truth. God is said to be one and that is a constant theme throughout the Quran. Quran says Allah forgive when one repents and that's is a consistent theme, there is no theory of crucifixion to earn salvation which contradicts the characteristics of God being Just and Merciful. Vikor mentioned theory of abrogation in Quran who he thinks is a contradiction and I will address that separately today in my another reply to same thread.

You also rejected another clear prophecy given by Jesus himself (Matthew 12:39) because it goes against your belief of crucifixon. So far to believe in crucifixtion you have rejected Isiah 52, Psalm 91 and Mathew 12:39. These are just few examples I gave and I can give many more examples which clearly show that there are several contradictions in Bible on theology. That is why you find Christians who do belive in one God and dont believe in holy spirit, Jesus; we also find Christians who only believe in god the father and god the son; we also find Christians who belive in trinity. How can one bible lead to three different gods? Please think about this seriously, it is matter of your own salvation.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

Malachi 4:1 (from memory, though that was over 3 decades ago). It's an interesting verse as relates to the Bible. There's not really anything to say he can't show different aspects of himself for different purposes, similar to the Islamic concept of abrogation, where he revealed different attitudes as the strength of the Muslim faithful grew.

So in relation to the change in the bible - one could argue, in a violent and harsh world, the people of God were not ready for a peaceful, loving way of being (which essentially would require protectors). And there was a wait for civilisation to reach a certain stage of development before it could be revealed. That's contradictory to the Quran, but it just shows you can argue many perspectives after the fact (if you start with an end point).

I will address what Bible say about nature of God in this reply and will address Quran and theory of abrogation in my next reply.

Bible says:

Quote:

For I, the Lord, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6)

This is exactly what I believe and it makes sense to me. God is eternal and should not change. Unfortunately the theology of trinity does not agree with this verse in Bible.

God has no need to change for He is complete and perfect in Himself and has no need of anything. The Covenantal name that He gave to Moses to tell the people of Israel just Who God was is this: I AM that I AM or I AM the self-existent One. We are human beings and there was a time when we had no being or did not exist. We are but finite creatures dependent upon food, air, water, sun and so on. We had a beginning and will have a physical ending but God has always existed and there was never a time that He did not exist and there will never be a time when He won’t exist. God needs nothing outside of Himself to exist. He is fully self-sufficient and self-contained.

Sad fact is that many Christian claim to believe in what I said above but still insist that trinity is true? May Allah guide those who are lost! Ameen!

0 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

similar to the Islamic concept of abrogation, where he revealed different attitudes as the strength of the Muslim faithful grew.

I will reply in as much detail as I can because I think it is very important for non-Muslims to understand what abrogation mean when we talk about this in context to Quran. Let's first see what is the source of theory of abrogation? It is actually based on the interpretation of two verses within the Quran.
First verse in Quran about abrogation (Quran 2:106)

Allah says in the Quran:

Quote:

Whichever Ayah We relinquish or cause to be forgotten We replace it with its equal or with that which is greater, did you not know that God is capable of all things? [Quran 2:106]

Second verse in the Quran about abrogation (Quran 16:101)

Quote:

When We substitute one Ayat (revelation) in place of another, and God is fully aware of what He reveals, they say, 'You made this up'. Indeed most of them do not know [Quran 16:101]

The Arabic word mentioned is above verses "ayat" can have several means but one which apply to these verses is ‘signs’ or ‘verses’ as well as ‘revelations’. These verses thus can be interpreted in two ways:

1. The revelations that are abrogated are those revelations that were revealed before the Quran, for example the Torah, the Zaboor and the Injeel. This interpretation also agrees with Quran when Allah says:

Quote:

Then we revealed to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming previous scriptures, and superseding them. [Quran 5:48]

So Quran 2:106 says that Allah does not cause the previous revelations to be forgotten but He substitutes them with something better or similar, indicating that the Torah, the Zaboor and the Injeel were substituted by the Quran.

2. If we consider that the Arabic word ayat in the above verse refers to the verses of the Quran, and not previous revelations, then it indicates that none of the verses of the Quran are abrogated by Allah but substituted with something better or similar. This means that certain verses of the Quran, that were revealed earlier were substituted by verses that were revealed later.
I agree with both the interpretations.

Many Muslims and non-Muslims misunderstand the second interpretation to mean that some of the earlier verses of the Quran were abrogated and no longer hold true for us today, as they have been replaced by the later verses of the Quran or the abrogating verses. This group of people even wrongly believe that these verses contradict each other.

Let us analyze this with an example:

A perfect example of abrogated verses in Quran is related to gradual prohibition of intoxicants. The first revelation of the Quran to deal with intoxicants was the following verse from Surah Baqarah:

Quote:

They ask you concerning wine and gambling say: In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit. [Al-Quran 2:219]

The next verse to be revealed regarding intoxicants is the following verse from Surah Nisa:

Quote:

O you who believe! approach not prayers with a mind befogged, until you can understand all that you say [Al-Qur’an 4:43]

The last verse to be revealed regarding intoxicants was the following verse from Surah Al-Maidah:

Quote:

O you who believe! intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination of Satan’s handiwork; eschew such (abomination), that you may prosper. [Al-Qur’an 5:90]

Now on surface it look like a contradiction. But let me explain so that we can appreciate the Divinee wisdom. The Quran was revealed over a period of 22½ years. Many reforms that were brought about in the society were gradual. This was to facilitate the adoption of new laws by the people. An abrupt change in society always leads to rebellion and anarchy.
The prohibition of intoxicants was revealed in three stages. The first revelation only mentioned that in the intoxicants there is great sin and some profit but the sin is greater than the profit. The next revelation prohibited praying in an intoxicated state, indicating that one should not consume intoxicants during the day, since a Muslim has to pray five times a day. This verse does state that when one is not praying at night one is allowed to consume intoxicants. It means one may have or one may not have. The Quran does not comment on it. If this verse had mentioned that one is allowed to have intoxicants while not praying then there would have been a contradiction. Allah chose words appropriately. Finally the total prohibition of intoxicants at all times was revealed in Surah Maidah chapter 5 verse 90.

This clearly indicates that the three verses do not contradict each other. Had they been contradicting, it would not have been possible to follow all the three verses simultaneously. Since a Muslim is expected to follow each and every verse of the Quran, only by following the last verse i.e. of Surah Maidah (5:90), he simultaneously agrees and follows the previous two verses.

This also applies in our day and time. If someone accepts Islam but he/she is a heavy drinker then he/she does not have to give up alcohol the day he/she accepted Islam. Just take the gradual approach as indicated in Quran and aim to give up alcohol slowly and steadily. Similarly, if one becomes Muslim then he/she can start praying one time a day and slowly makes his/her way to five daily prayers. Islam is a religion which is purely based on human nature and I love Islam.

I hope this helps you to understand the concept of abrogation. If you have any particular verses you want to discuss, please let me know and I will try to explain those.

1 Reply

@HabibUrrehman,

You are saying that, according to the theory of abrogation, God could replace a concept with one equal or better (in your version, the Torah with the Quran). That should mean that Muslims should have no issue with the concept of God showing an equal or better version of how he would like humans to live (the Old to New Testament).

Same goes for how he would like them to relate to him. Does it change the nature of God? Hardly - most people show different aspects of themselves to different friends, so that each of those friends of theirs feels comfortable / forms a deeper connection with them. Such is often done out of thoughtfulness for that friend. Ie. It is quite possible for you to not show every aspect of yourself to someone.

You are arguing the New Testament as a fundamental change in God's nature (where there doesn't have to be one), rather than a revealing of a different aspect, or even just a shift based on circumstances in how he would like his people to relate to him or behave (and as behavioural teachings differed from Mohammed's early teaching in Mecca, to what happened after he got control of an army in Medina, this shouldn't be an issue either)

As a note - I don't care particularly much about the above. It's only interesting to me because your writings seem to clash with your own beliefs. You appear to apply what should be principles (if you are to use them to interpret religious meaning) selectively.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

You misunderstood my whole point. Abrogation only deals with" the legal laws of Islam" and I explained why is so in my previous post. Abrogation does not apply to the theology. God is one, was one and will remain one.

4 minutes long video below summarises my POV on abbrogations

https://youtu.be/BSOneNzShwY

It appears you skimmed through my previous post and rushed to respond back. Please take your time to read the entire post and hope that will help.

1 Reply

@HabibUrrehman,

Hi Habib

Your video was helpful.

Quote:

abbrogation only deals with" the legal laws of Islam" and I explained why is so in my previous post.

You never actually mentioned that abrogation only deals only with the legal laws of Islam. Laws are mentioned, but they were in broad context. And in fact you did say that it allows previous religious texts to be superceded (without making it explicit that only the laws were affected).

Quote:

1. The revelations that are abrogated are those revelations that were revealed before the Quran, for example the Torah, the Zaboor and the Injeel. This interpretation also agrees with Quran when Allah says:

Reading back through your post, without further explanation, I would have arrived at the same conclusion (that is, skimming as you put it, wasn't the issue). So thank you for the video. It actually explains some issues.

As a note, we are still in disagreement, however articulating that disagreement seems to me to be much more work than would be interesting for me.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

I am sorry if I was not clear in my explanation. Good to know that the video was helpful. Cheers!

Little off topic, but I saw that you are from Australia. Must be a cricket lover? I love cricket but unfortunately it is not played much in USA. Steve Smith is my favorite cricketer by the way.

1 Reply

@HabibUrrehman,

Most sports. I used to watch test cricket a lot more when I was younger - from the days when we couldn't win anything, to the days when we dominated world cricket. In the 80's it was a very stately game, played with spirit and honesty. In recent times, a lot of 'personalities' in the Australian team turned me off it, and their desire to constantly sledge opposition on the field. But I still watch 20/20.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Cricket is no more a gentleman's game but still better than most games. I still like test cricket. Steve Smith is pure class, can't believe that he was selected in the team as a leg spinner and eventually developed into Australia's main batsman.

20/20 is probably bad for test cricket but good for players who want to earn money through cricket even if they have no skills and temperament for test cricket. 20/20 is also important to keep cricket alive and may be this format can help cricket to find its place in Olympics one day.

Happy that I can talk about cricket to someone Very Happy

1 Reply

@HabibUrrehman,

When I was a child in primary school, a teacher proudly proclaimed "Cricket is a gentleman's game, second only to golf in sportsmanship'. And at that time, he was right. Australia played fair, and as best they could. Among the gentlemanly greats were: Imran Khan, Clive Lloyd and Viv Richards, Sunnil Gavaskar, Richard Hadlee, and any number of quieter West Indian fast bowlers. Allan Border was a great, but he was rather stoic under the immense pressure he felt carrying the Australian Team at that time. Adam Gilchrist was the last batsman I saw to embody that in the Australian team - he would walk whenever he thought he was out, without waiting for the umpire.

Steve Smith is pure class. No so David Warner unfortunately - great batsman, but bad for team culture from everything I can work out.

Which country do you follow on the world stage?

1 Reply

@vikorr,

I think the dressing room culture of Australian Cricket team changed when Ponting took over. I hope David Warner would have learned from his one year ban. Mean while, Tim Paine and Justin Langer have done well to bring back the spirit of cricket in Australian dressing room to some extent. NZ's cricket spirit is probably the best of all the teams and a template for other teams to follow.

I don't have a favorite team, just enjoy cricket in general. I mostly follow NZ, AUS, SA and England ( got crazy lucky to win the WC). India is good too but I think they pretty much control ICC.

1 Reply

@HabibUrrehman,

Ponting was a product of a long slow slide. Taylor was tactically a good captain, well spoken, he thought sledging was okay, and it grew under his watch. Steve Waugh was as tough as nails, though not as well spoken, and sledging developed even further under his watch, until it became an ingrained part of 'the Australian game plan'. Ponting inherited the tail end of over a decade of slowly tolerating more and more bad behaviour. And the greats starting to retire didn't help his cause.

I think the bans did the Australian team the world of good.

I enjoy watching India bat, but you are right - the Indians think they own the ICC. Hard to argue I guess, when most of cricket's money is coming from India.

England getting lucky in the WC is not actually that surprising - they fielded well. Australia was in the doldrums in test cricket in 1987, but won the world cup, as it concentrated on superior fielding & not dropping catches. It was an average team full of great fielders. Other teams I've watched who have great fielders just do well. In the 50 over game, fielding is super important.

0 Replies

How can a good God allow suffering

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know