Muhammad is "Son of Man" in Bible?

[LittleLambofJesus]

I was reading thru another thread and found this posted by a Muslim at the link below.

Here the Muslims are using the OT Hebrew Scriptures to show Muhammad is "the son of man" shown in the Bible, though the Christian NT shows Jesus as "the son of man". What gives here and how do Jews respond to it? Thanks.

Matthew 26:63 and Jesus was silent. And the Chief-priest answering said to Him "I adjure thee, by the living God, that thou mayest say to us, if thou art the Christ--the Son of the God."
64 Jesus Is saying to him "thou say, moreover I am saying to ye from present/now ye shall be seeing the Son of the Man sitting out of rights of the power and coming upon the clouds of the heaven".
[Jeremiah 4:13/Reve 1:7/6:16]

http://www.christianforums.com/t4410009/#post29873987

This is an interestin article.

Yes , islam did not spread to the whole world with sword. Only with sword such a big success could not be possibble.

But the fact is Prophet Muhammad pbuh had a sword and he has used it in the name of Allah.

Like the described son of man in the Bible , which is clearly prophet Muhammad pbuh.

*snip*

Prophet Muhammad Is The Son-Of-Man

In the previous discourse we perused and commented upon the marvelous vision of the Prophet Daniel (Dan. vii.). We saw how the four beasts that represented the four king- doms succeeding one another were the Powers of Darkness and how they persecuted the Jews and the early Church of Jesus, which was constituted of true believers in the One God.

We also remarked that those Powers were pagan and allegorically described as ferocious brutes. Further, we saw that the "Eleventh Horn," which had eyes and mouth, which uttered blasphemies against the Most High had fought and overcome His Saints had changed the times and the Law of God, could be no other than the Emperor Constantine, who in AD. 325, promulgated his imperial rescript proclaiming the creed and the decisions of the Nicene General Council............

 

[ApplePie7]

I was reading thru another thread and found this posted by a Muslim at the link below.

Here the Muslims are using the OT Hebrew Scriptures to show Muhammad is "the son of man" shown in the Bible, though the Christian NT shows Jesus as "the son of man". What gives here and how do Jews respond to it? Thanks.

Matthew 26:63 and Jesus was silent. And the Chief-priest answering said to Him "I adjure thee, by the living God, that thou mayest say to us, if thou art the Christ--the Son of the God."
64 Jesus Is saying to him "thou say, moreover I am saying to ye from present/now ye shall be seeing the Son of the Man sitting out of rights of the power and coming upon the clouds of the heaven".
[Jeremiah 4:13/Reve 1:7/6:16]

http://www.christianforums.com/t4410009/#post29873987

This is an interestin article.

Yes , islam did not spread to the whole world with sword. Only with sword such a big success could not be possibble.

But the fact is Prophet Muhammad pbuh had a sword and he has used it in the name of Allah.

Like the described son of man in the Bible , which is clearly prophet Muhammad pbuh.

*snip*

Prophet Muhammad Is The Son-Of-Man

In the previous discourse we perused and commented upon the marvelous vision of the Prophet Daniel (Dan. vii.). We saw how the four beasts that represented the four king- doms succeeding one another were the Powers of Darkness and how they persecuted the Jews and the early Church of Jesus, which was constituted of true believers in the One God.

We also remarked that those Powers were pagan and allegorically described as ferocious brutes. Further, we saw that the "Eleventh Horn," which had eyes and mouth, which uttered blasphemies against the Most High had fought and overcome His Saints had changed the times and the Law of God, could be no other than the Emperor Constantine, who in AD. 325, promulgated his imperial rescript proclaiming the creed and the decisions of the Nicene General Council............

Seems we have yet another Muslim attempt to align their "Muhammad" with Biblical scripture.

We have to ask ourselves why it is that Muslims would recite the mantra of "Muhammad" in the very same breath as their god "allah".

Why would they want so desperately for their "Muhammad" to be found in the Holy Bible in the first place?

The answer is that they have a twisted understanding of who the Koranic "Muhammad" really is. Now...if the Koranic "Muhammad" were actually merely an epithet for the Biblical Jesus Christ, then this all makes perfect sense....as we Know that it is perfectly acceptable to mention Jesus in the same breath as God - as He is God. We also have no issue with Jesus being referenced in the OT.

Muslims feel the urge to do the same - but are incapable of admitting that the person that the Koran refers to as "Muhammad" is actually a direct reference to the Biblical Jesus Christ...

 

[Islam_mulia]

Here the Muslims are using the OT Hebrew Scriptures to show Muhammad is "the son of man" shown in the Bible, though the Christian NT shows Jesus as "the son of man". What gives here and how do Jews respond to it? Thanks.

Matthew 26:63 and Jesus was silent. And the Chief-priest answering said to Him "I adjure thee, by the living God, that thou mayest say to us, if thou art the Christ--the Son of the God."
64 Jesus Is saying to him "thou say, moreover I am saying to ye from present/now ye shall be seeing the Son of the Man sitting out of rights of the power and coming upon the clouds of the heaven".
[Jeremiah 4:13/Reve 1:7/6:16]

http://www.christianforums.com/t4410009/#post29873987

It is not clear from the passage that Jesus was saying he was the Son of Man.

From what I understand, Jesus was asked to confirm that he was the Son of God. Jesus replied 'You said that'. In other words, Jesus did not say he was the Son of God but the one who asked him claimed so.

As the passage is from Matthew, you'll be surprised that Jesus NEVER claimed to be the Son of God in the gospels according to Matthew, Mark or Luke.

Diverting from the 'Son of God' question, Jesus instead referred them to the Son of Man which he claimed the Jews at his time will be seeing coming down from the sky. (This definitely rules out Jesus as Son of Man).

We know that no Son of Man came down from the sky at Judea at Jesus' time. So who is the Son of Man?

 

[_JJM]

As the passage is from Matthew, you'll be surprised that Jesus NEVER claimed to be the Son of God in the gospels according to Matthew, Mark or Luke.

Matthew 16:15-17
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

 

[Islam_mulia]

Matthew 16:15-17
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

Jesus did not say he was God. He merely confirmed what Simon Peter said thet Jesus was the Christ (Messiah).

The context in Matthew above is NOT on the divinity of Christ bot in Jesus' role as a Messiah (Christ). This is clear if we look at the whole passage:


Peter Confesses Jesus as the Christ


13 When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?”
14 So they said, “Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed[d] in heaven.”
20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ.


Verse 20 summarises the header : Jesus confirmed he was the Christ and spoke no such thing as being divine.

There is nothing in Mark, Mathhew and Luke which has Jesus confirming he was the Son of God.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

*snip*

There is nothing in Mark, Mathhew and Luke which has Jesus confirming he was the Son of God.

He does in the jewish/hebrew book of Revelation tho

Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software

Matthew 17:5 Still of-Him speaking, behold! a luminous cloud over-shadows them.
And behold! a Voice out of the cloud saying "this is the Son of Me, the Beloved, in whom I delight, be ye hearing Him!".
[Deut 18]

Revelation 2:18 And to the messenger of the Out-called in Thyatira, write thou!
Now this is saying the Son of the God, the One having the eyes of Him as flame of fire, and the feet of Him as to burnished-brass.

 

[_JJM]

There is nothing in Mark, Mathhew and Luke which has Jesus confirming he was the Son of God.

Peter says he is the "Son of the living God" and Jesus confirms that God the Father revealed this to him.

Matthew 16:15-17
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

 

[humblemuslim]

I always found it odd that both titles 'Son of Man' and 'Son of God' were both attributed to Jesus which has developed into a duality belief (Fully human and Fully GOD).

I have never seen anyone argue that Muhammad is the 'Son of Man'. An interesting topic.

PS

What is that avatar LLOJ? (I am asking about it as your title instructs )

 

[Islam_mulia]

Peter says he is the "Son of the living God" and Jesus confirms that God the Father revealed this to him.

Matthew 16:15-17
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

Read my reply on Post #5.

What is the context of the passage? What is the header? It states
Peter Confesses Jesus as the Christ

Peter and Jesus were discussing the Messiahship. The Son of God is just another phrase for pious people, and Christ, in the language of the bible, is given that title together with other personalities in the bible.

 

[_JJM]

Islam Mulia,

The angel announced that He is the Son of God:

Luke 1:31-35
31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name JESUS. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”
34 Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
35 And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.

 

[Islam_mulia]

Islam Mulia,

The angel announced that He is the Son of God:

Luke 1:31-35
31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name JESUS. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”
34 Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
35 And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.

I find that Christians can be indecisive at times. I've seen so many Christians questioning the integrity of the angel bringing the message of God to Muhammad (pbuh), even asking if it was indeed an angel. Here, when the bible talks about an angel bringing good news to Mary, they accept it as the ultimate truth.

 

[Islam_mulia]

Joshua_Masquelier

I am sure you would agree with me that Jesus is NOT the only Son of God as mentioned in the Bible.

David was also a Son of God:
I will declare thee a decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. PSALMS 2.7

In fact, the bible speaks of dozens of Sons of God... even peacemakers are called sons of God.

 

[_JJM]

I find that Christians can be indecisive at times. I've seen so many Christians questioning the integrity of the angel bringing the message of God to Muhammad (pbuh), even asking if it was indeed an angel. Here, when the bible talks about an angel bringing good news to Mary, they accept it as the ultimate truth.

We can make that another discussion if you'd like, but the point here is that Jesus is made known as the Son of God in the passages of Matthew and Luke that I have quoted. Not to mention numerous other places in the NT, but you referred to the Synoptics alone.

Muhammed claims to have received angelic revelation. His revelation slanders the work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Muhammed's account of the life of Christ is an attempt to destroy the glory of his death and resurrection. We were warned to avoid this man and his testimony:

Galatians 1:6-9
6 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.

2 Cor 11:13-15
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

Please excuse my insinuations about Muhammed, as far as they have offended your conscience, but we should discuss how his message is not only a contradiction of the true Gospel, it is an affront against it. Things such as Judas being crucified in place of Jesus, and so forth. This alone destroys the whole message for a person if they are led astray by its falsehood.

 

[Islam_mulia]

We can make that another discussion if you'd like, but the point here is that Jesus is made known as the Son of God in the passages of Matthew and Luke that I have quoted. Not to mention numerous other places in the NT, but you referred to the Synoptics alone.

You may have misread my posts. I said Jesus never claimed to be a Son of God in the Synoptic Gospels. Others may have made such refrence to him, but that is another thing altogether.

Muhammed claims to have received angelic revelation. His revelation slanders the work of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Actually, it is the Quran that defends Jesus from being falsely labelled as god. Trust me, if you read the bible in the perspective of the Quran, you'll find what I say to be delightfully true.

Muhammed's account of the life of Christ is an attempt to destroy the glory of his death and resurrection. We were warned to avoid this man and his testimony:

Maybe the Quranic account is the true story. There is no historical evidence that he was crucified.

Galatians 1:6-9
6 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.

You are shooting blindly. Gabriel does not preach, he is merely a messenger of God. The above does not apply to us, right?

2 Cor 11:13-15
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

So, you do have false apostles of Christ. They still hold the title 'apostles' so maybe you should question if what you received are truely from God.

Please excuse my insinuations about Muhammed, as far as they have offended your conscience, but we should discuss how his message is not only a contradiction of the true Gospel, it is an affront against it. Things such as Judas being crucified in place of Jesus, and so forth. This alone destroys the whole message for a person if they are led astray by its falsehood.

I never claimed nor believe it was Judas who was crucified. The whole crucifixion story could well be a myth and maybe no one was actually hurt.

 

[Catherineanne]

I was reading thru another thread and found this posted by a Muslim at the link below.

Here the Muslims are using the OT Hebrew Scriptures to show Muhammad is "the son of man" shown in the Bible, though the Christian NT shows Jesus as "the son of man". What gives here and how do Jews respond to it? Thanks.

In one sense the Moslems are ok saying this. Son of man is a term of the Old Testament to refer to mankind, so any person can be a son of man; my dad, my brothers, the Pope, anyone at all.

Christ used this term to refer to himself, because he couldn't really go around calling himself son of God, but in reality, of course, he is both. But there is no special distinction in this term; the son of man is not above other sons of man, he is one of them.

If Moslems want to say that Mohammed was also a son of man, then that is fine with me; indeed he is. But he is not the one referred to in Scripture, because Scripture does not anywhere refer to Mohammed. It is totally indifferent to him, as if he never existed. Which is fine by most Christians, to be honest.

Sorry about that, Moslems, but it is the truth.

 

[Catherineanne]

I find that Christians can be indecisive at times. I've seen so many Christians questioning the integrity of the angel bringing the message of God to Muhammad (pbuh), even asking if it was indeed an angel. Here, when the bible talks about an angel bringing good news to Mary, they accept it as the ultimate truth.

I wouldn't take it personally if I were you. We also doubt that an angel appeared to Joseph Smith and founded Mormonism. Well, most of us do, anyway.

Take a look at that one for yourself, and you will soon learn how it is possible to accept some revelation, and be distinctly wary of others. Read about this particular person, and understand, if you can, that my attitude towards Mohammed is pretty well the same as my attitude towards Joseph Smith.

In neither case has this anything to do with indecision.

Joseph Smith, Jr. - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

 

[Catherineanne]

The whole crucifixion story could well be a myth and maybe no one was actually hurt.

You may think you can say this as a Moslem, but you do not realise what it is that you are saying. By suggesting that the crucifixion story may not be not true, you are saying that the whole of our faith may not be true.

Without the crucifixion, there is no redemption. Without the crucifixion the Incarnation is meaningless. Without the Incarnation, there is no Christianity.

This simply is not negotiable. Absolutely, 100% not.

K, here is a parallel, keeping away from personal comment about character; Mohammed may well have sat at his kitchen table, and read the Koran off the back of a Cornflakes box.

Indeed he may, but to say this is to deny the WHOLE of Islam. Not just a bit of it; every single part; ALL of it.

Can you see this? And seeing this, can you also see how the Koran forbids this language? You are told to respect our faith, and respect our Scriptures. You are forbidden from denying them to this extent, and negating the whole of our faith. The best you can do, really, is to keep quiet and leave this to God.

Good luck with that.

 

[Catherineanne]

Muhammed claims to have received angelic revelation. His revelation slanders the work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Muhammed's account of the life of Christ is an attempt to destroy the glory of his death and resurrection.

It is certainly the case that Mohammed does not understand what Christianity is, or who Christ was. Whether he did this in order to attempt to destroy anything is a matter of debate, but certainly the Koran is deeply flawed in this matter.

 

[Catherineanne]

Joshua_Masquelier

I am sure you would agree with me that Jesus is NOT the only Son of God as mentioned in the Bible.

David was also a Son of God:
I will declare thee a decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. PSALMS 2.7

In fact, the bible speaks of dozens of Sons of God... even peacemakers are called sons of God.

I hate to say this, but your language here is distinctly unMoslem.

Why are you talking like this?

Does Allah have sons?

Or could it be that Islam is missing something? Surely not!

Here is the missing link for you: Christ is the Son of God, who by his death and resurrection takes away the sin of the world. By accepting him as our Lord, we become co-heirs with him of his kingdom, and we become the sons and daughters of the Most High. As David was, as Abraham was, as Moses was.

All 'sons of God' become so through Christ. He is born the Son of God, and we are adopted through him. This is why the Lord taught us to address God as, 'Our Father, who art in heaven.'

 

[_JJM]

I never claimed nor believe it was Judas who was crucified. The whole crucifixion story could well be a myth and maybe no one was actually hurt.

The apostles of Christ were eyewitnesses to the truth of Jesus Christ as revealed in the New Testament.

Muhammed was not an eyewitness. He received a contradictory testimony from an angel 600 years later. We were warned to avoid a man such as this.

2 Pet 1:16
16 For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. 17 For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” 18 And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.