Who is the Comforter?

Fredi,

From you: "bmz - so the matter of muhammad being the "comforter" is of no importance to you.  that being so, where exactly is muhammad to be found in the bible? - remember he said that he was in the bible - so if he is not then he is certainly no prophet."

Neither Muhammad said that he was in the Bible nor Qur'aan says that Muhammad was in the Bible.

Qur'aan does not mention the term Bible at all. Qur'aan specifically names only Torah and the Injeel. The entire NT is NOT the Injeel and the entire OT is not the Torah.

Lots of other books have been thrown out under the cover of apocrypha. The words in the four gospels had been forged to suit the Nicene creed. If you read carefully, you will find that it was Muhammad who was to come after Jesus, not the Holy Spirit.

If the Holy Spirit had really come at the pentecost, it would not have taken 365 years of infighting, arguments and philosophies as to who Jesus was, by various famed scholars and priests some of whom were kicked out, to conclude a Nicean Creed.

We can thus say that in reality, that no Holy Spirit came as the Comforter after Jesus. The Holy Spirit according to Christian literature had already filled Jesus and had been there before him and had covered him. It had to be a new Holy Spirit this time and note the word Comforter which does not translate well at all into Holy Spirit.

BMZ 

bmzsp wrote: Fredi, From you: "bmz - so the matter of muhammad being the "comforter" is of no importance to you.  that being so, where exactly is muhammad to be found in the bible? - remember he said that he was in the bible - so if he is not then he is certainly no prophet." Neither Muhammad said that he was in the Bible nor Qur'aan says that Muhammad was in the Bible. Qur'aan does not mention the term Bible at all. Qur'aan specifically names only Torah and the Injeel. The entire NT is NOT the Injeel and the entire OT is not the Torah. Lots of other books have been thrown out under the cover of apocrypha. The words in the four gospels had been forged to suit the Nicene creed. If you read carefully, you will find that it was Muhammad who was to come after Jesus, not the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit had really come at the pentecost, it would not have taken 365 years of infighting, arguments and philosophies as to who Jesus was, by various famed scholars and priests some of whom were kicked out, to conclude a Nicean Creed. We can thus say that in reality, that no Holy Spirit came as the Comforter after Jesus. The Holy Spirit according to Christian literature had already filled Jesus and had been there before him and had covered him. It had to be a new Holy Spirit this time and note the word Comforter which does not translate well at all into Holy Spirit. BMZ

bmz - the bible does not mention the term "bible" - the Lord Jesus stated categorically that the Comforter is the Holy Spirit.  your assertion that parts of the Word of God have been "thrown out" and "forged" is futile - even the quran says "there is none to change the words of Allah" - you are saying that Allah has not been able to preserve his word.  also, muslims on this forum have been saying that the holy spirit is gabriel, so why are you making out he is muhammad?

Fredi,

From you: "bmz - so the matter of muhammad being the "comforter" is of no importance to you.  that being so, where exactly is muhammad to be found in the bible? - remember he said that he was in the bible - so if he is not then he is certainly no prophet."

Neither Muhammad said that he was in the Bible nor Qur'aan says that Muhammad was in the Bible.

Qur'aan does not mention the term Bible at all. Qur'aan specifically names only Torah and the Injeel. The entire NT is NOT the Injeel and the entire OT is not the Torah.

Well, I guess the Muslims can stop looking for Muhammad's name in the other books of the Bible, such as Isaiah, Song of Songs, Habakkuk and the like. 

Lots of other books have been thrown out under the cover of apocrypha. The words in the four gospels had been forged to suit the Nicene creed. If you read carefully, you will find that it was Muhammad who was to come after Jesus, not the Holy Spirit.

This is nonsense, BMZ.  The Gospels and other books of the New Testament were already in wide circulation by the AD200's and in many different languages, well before Nicene Creed.

Polycarp (70-155/160). Bishop of Smyrna. Disciple of John the Apostle.
     "O Lord God almighty...I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever" (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).

Justin Martyr (100?-165?). He was a Christian apologist and martyr.
      "For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water" (First Apol., LXI).

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
      "In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever" (n. 7; PG 5.988).

Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.
      "The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: ...one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father �to gather all things in one,' and to raise up anew all flesh of the w hole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, �every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all...'" (Against Heresies X.l)

Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
      "We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation...[which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit." (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

You know very well why the apocrypha were not considered canon.  You know the criteria for inclusion in the canon.

If the Holy Spirit had really come at the pentecost, it would not have taken 365 years of infighting, arguments and philosophies as to who Jesus was, by various famed scholars and priests some of whom were kicked out, to conclude a Nicean Creed.

More nonsense, BMZ.  Your opinion bears no weight.  Sorry.

We can thus say that in reality, that no Holy Spirit came as the Comforter after Jesus. The Holy Spirit according to Christian literature had already filled Jesus and had been there before him and had covered him. It had to be a new Holy Spirit this time and note the word Comforter which does not translate well at all into Holy Spirit.

Keeping Islam out of the equation for the moment, and as a reminder of Christian history, it might be borne in mind that the idea that the expected �Paraclete� is a supernatural entity, call it spirit, which works, not of itself, but through an individual to give him or her prophetic and authoritative utterances was apparently widespread in the early days of Christendom.

Consider the case of Montanus who fancied himself the �Paraclete� and took half of 2^nd Century Christianity along with him into what is now termed �Montanism.�  I might be off in the percentages, but this includes, by the way, and at least at times, our friend from another thread, the pugnacious Tertullian.  Also, it is interesting to note that this movement, Montanism, is at times compared to certain modern strains of evangelical fundamentalism though usually by its harsher critics.

Anyway, here are the details: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm

Servetus