Who is the comforter
Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Interfaith Dialogue
Forum Description: It is for Interfaith dialogue, where Muslims discuss with non-Muslims. We encourge that dialogue takes place in a cordial atmosphere on various topics including religious tolerance.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=42434
Printed Date: 21 November 2024 at 9:07am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Who is the comforter
Posted By: truthnowcome
Subject: Who is the comforter
Date Posted: 01 April 2018 at 7:55am
|
Peace to all. I decided to repost this info on a new thread. THE COMFORTER
“The Religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His Will)…But if you deny the Signs of Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account.” (Quran. 3:19) “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will (Islam) be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”(Matthew 6:9) The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah - the which We have sent by inspiration to thee - and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: Namely, that ye should remain steadfast in religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him). (Ash-Shura 42:13) It also mentioned in Quran 4:163: We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms. 64Of some messengers We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah spoke direct;-. (An-Nisa' 4:163-64)
TWO PERSONALITY (1John.2: 1) “...we have an “advocate (comforter)” with the father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” http://classic.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=1jo+2:1&translation=kjv&ot=bhs&nt=na&sr=1" rel="nofollow -
(John14: 26) “but the comforter which is the holy ghost...” http://classic.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=joh+14%3A26§ion=0&it=kjv&oq=joh%252014%3A26&ot=bhs&nt=na&new=1&nb=joh&ng=14&ncc=14" rel="nofollow -
ONE IN HEAVEN (John 14:16) “…I will pray to the father, and “he” shall give you another comforter that he may abide with you for ever. (John 16:7) “Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is expedient for you that I go for if I go not away, the comforter will not come unto you, but if I depart, I will send him unto you!” In heaven: (John 3: 13 kjv) “and no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is ‘in’ heaven.” Jesus pbuh was the Son of man “ON” earth and he spoke about “another” Son of man which is “IN” heaven. (Greek: See page 7)
ONE THAT DWELL WITH YOU (John14: 16-17) 17even the spirit of truth: whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you and shall be in you. (John14: 26) “But the comforter which is the holy ghost...” (John 1:32) I saw the spirit descending from heaven... and abode upon him.” (Al-Maa'idah 5:110) “…Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah and his word (be), which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from him (roohun minhu)… (Qur’an 4: 171); o! Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Remember my favour to you and to your mother when i supported you with rooh ul qudus [Jibreel (Gabriel)].” (John. 20:21-22) “...as my father hath sent me, even so I send you (the disciple) and when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said unto them, received ye the holy ghost.” (Qur’an 58:22) thou wilt not find any people who believe in allah and the last day, loving those who oppose allah and his messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred. for such he has written faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with a spirit from himself (roohin-minhu)...”
TRUE PROPHER WITH TRUE SPIRIT: Speak hear: (John 16:13) “…for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear” Does spirit speak and hear? (1John 4:1-2) “Beloved, believes not every spirit, but tries the spirits whether they are of god because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 hereby know ye the spirit of god: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of god: “because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” (Quran 7:157) "Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;-
SIN RIGHTEOUS: (John.16:8). “And when he (the Comforter) is come, he will reprove the world of SIN, and of RIGHTEOUSNESS, and of judgment.” (Quran 7:157) "Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper. (Q. 53:3-5) Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him. he was taught by one Mighty in Power. (Q. 29:48) And thou (O Muhammad) was not (able) to recite a book before this (book came), nor art thou (able) to transcribe it with thy right hand: in that case indeed, would the talkers of vanity have doubted. (Q. 53:3-5) Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him. He was taught by one mighty in power. Br. Zainool ------------- LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES! |
Replies:
Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 01 April 2018 at 7:56am
|
JUDGMENT (John.16:8). “And when he (the Comforter) is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of JUDGMENT.” (Quran 7:157) "Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper. (Isaiah 42:1-4) “Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my Spirit upon him: he shall bring forth JUDGMENT TO THE GENTILE.” 3A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax he shall he not quench: he shall bring forth Judgment unto truth. 4- He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he has SET JUDGMENT IN THE EARTH: and the isles shall wait for HIS LAW. (Isaiah 42:1-4) (Isaiah 42:9-10) “Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you.”(Isaiah 42:9)10-Sing unto the Lord a new song and his praise from the end of the earth… (Isaiah 42:10) (Quran. 21:1-2) Closer and closer to mankind comes their Reckoning: yet they heed not and they turn away. 2Never comes (aught) to them of a renewed message from their Lord, but they listen to it as in jest, (Isaiah 42:11) 11-Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voice, the village that Kedar doth inhabit: let the inhabitants of the rock, let them shout from the top of the mountains. (Genesis 25:13) “And these are the names of the son Ishmael, by their names according to their generations: the first born of Ishmael, Nebajoth…and Kedar...” (Genesis 49:10) “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shi-loh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people.” (Rev. 14:6-7) “And I saw another angel fly in the mid of Heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nations, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying... fear God and give glory to him FOR JUDGMENT IS COME.” (Q. 25:1) “Blessed is He who sent down the CRITERION (OF JUDGMENT between right and wrong, i.e. the Qur’an) to his slave [Muhammad (pbuh)] that he may be a Warner to the ‘Alamin (mankind and jinn).” (Q. 13:37) “Thus have We revealed it (the Qur’an) to be a JUDGMENT OF AUTHORITY in Arabic” (Qur’an 2:185) “Ramadhan is the (month) in which was sent down the Qur'an, as a guide to mankind, also clear (Signs) for guidance and JUDGMENT (between right and wrong)”. (Isaiah 28:2) “Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which as a tempest of hail a destroying storm, as a flood of mighty water overflowing, shall cast down to the earth with the hand.” (Isaiah 28:25) 26for his God doth instruct him to discretion, and doth teach him. (John 16:13) “…for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear” (Q. 53:3-5) Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him. He was taught by one Mighty in Power. (Isaiah 28:17) 17JUDGMENTS also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of LIES. And the water (people and multitude) shall overflow the hiding place. (Q. 33:21) “Ye have indeed in the Apostle of God a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in God and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of God.” (Isaiah 28:7-9) For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little: For with stammering lip another tongue will he speak to this people. (Jude 1:14-15) And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15To execute JUDGMENT UPON ALL, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Qur’an 34:28) “We have not sent thee but as a universal Messenger to all mankind…but most of mankind know not.”. THE ADVENT OF MUHAMMAD PBUH IN DEUTERONOMY 33: “And he [Moses (pbuh) said: the Lord came from Sinai, and rose from Sir unto them; He shined forth from Mount Paran, and he came with “ten thousand Saints”: from his right hand went a “fiery Law” for them.” (Duet. 33:2) (Jude 1:14-15) And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15To EXECUTE JUDGMENT UPON ALL, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Quran 7:157) "Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper. THE ADVENT OF MUHAMMAD PBUH IN HABAKKUK 3: …And the Holy One from Mount Paran. Se-lah. His Glory covered the heaven, and the earth was full of his praise. He stood and measured the earth…he beheld and drove asunder the nations…His way are everlasting…at the light of thine arrows they went, and at the shining of thy glittering spear. Thou didst tresh the heathen in anger. Thou wentest forth for Salvation of thy people, even Salvation for the anointed” (Habakkuk. 3:3-13(KJV)) (Genesis 21:21). “AND HE [ISHMAEL PBUH] DWELT IN THE WILDERNESS OF PARAN
THE ADVENT OF MUHAMMAD IN REVELATION 10: And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven. 2-And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth. 3-And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voice. 4-And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from haven saying unto, seal up those things which the seven thunder utters, and write them not.” Rev.10:1-4 “But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound: the mystery of God should finish as he declared to his servants the prophets. (Rev. 10:7) …Truth has (now) come, and falsehood perished: for falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish. (Q. 17:81) Br. Zainool ------------- LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES! |
Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 01 April 2018 at 7:57am
|
THE ADVENT OF MUHAMMAD PBUH IN ISAIAH 29: 12And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, read this I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned. (Isaiah 29:12 KJV) 1) https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/isa/29/1/t_conc_708012" rel="nofollow - 2) https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/bi12/books/isaiah/29/" rel="nofollow -
Read: In the name of thy Lord who created. Created man from a clot. Read: and thy Lord is the Most Bounteous, Who taught by the pen, Taught man which he knew not. (Q. 96:1-5) Those who fallow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mention in their own (Scriptures), In the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel). (Q. 7:157). And thou (O Muhammad) was not (able) to recite a book before this (book came), nor art thou (able) to transcribe it with thy right hand: in that case indeed, would the talkers of vanity have doubted. (Q. 29:48) Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him. He was taught by one mighty in power. (Q. 53:3-5) (Isaiah 29:14) “Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.” (Matt.21:42) Jesus said unto them (Jews), Did ye never read in the scriptures, the stone which the builders reject the same is become the head of the corner: This is the Lord’s doings, and it is marvelous in our eyes. “Therefore say I unto you The kingdom of God shall taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” (Matt. 21:43) https://www.dropbox.com/s/o3xhwukgzc8i6xd/hajj.JPG?dl=0" rel="nofollow - - https://www.dropbox.com/s/o3xhwukgzc8i6xd/hajj.JPG?dl=0
ANOTHER MESSAGE TO COME: “I must preach kingdom of God to the other cities also, because for this purpose I have been sent" (Luke 4:43 NKJV) “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.10thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”(Matthew 6:9-10) “The Religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His Will)…But if you deny the Signs of Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account.” (Quran. 3:19) This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. (Q. 5:3) And he said, whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God? or with what comparison shall we compare it? (Mark 4:30) “Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, the kingdom of heaven is like to “a grain of mustard seed”, which “A MAN” took, and sowed in his field: 32Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh “a tree”, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches. (Matthew 13:31-32) Now the parable is this: The “seed” is the “word of God”. (Luke 8:11) “And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron…“Now comes” SALVATION and strength, and THE KINGDOM OF OUR GOD…” (Rev. 12:5-10) “This Qur'an is not such as can be produced by other than Allah. on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book - wherein there is no doubt - from the Lord of the worlds.” (Qur. 10:37) …So fear Allah, and obey me [Muhammad (S) and the message he brought]. (Q.3:50) Verily this Qur’an doith guide to that which is most right. (Q. 17:9) “O ye People of the Book! Believe in what We have (now) revealed, conforming what was (already) with you…” (Q. 4:47) People of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that you used to hide in your Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary): There hath come to you from Allah a light [Muhamed (pbuh)] and a perspicuous Book.” (Q. 5:15) …Truth has (now) come, and falsehood perished: for falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish. (Q. 17:81)
The warning from Allah the Most High, He said: “Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We have sent down, and the Guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book,-on them shall be Allah's curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse,” (Q. 2:159) Those who conceal Allah's revelations in the Book, and purchase for them a miserable profit, - they swallow into themselves naught but Fire; Allah will not address them on the Day of Resurrection. Nor purify them: Grievous will be their penalty. (Q. 2:174)
On the Day of Judgment: Then would those who are followed clear themselves of those who follow (them) : They would see the penalty, and all relations between them would be cut off. And those who followed would say: "If only We had one more chance, We would clear ourselves of them, as they have cleared themselves of us." Thus will Allah show them (The fruits of) their deeds as (nothing but) regrets. Nor will there be a way for them out of the Fire. (Qur. 2:162-166) Allah the Most High informs us: “There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (as they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, “That is from Allah,” But it is not from Allah: it is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it! (Q. 3:78) · Ye People of the Book! Why do you mix truth with falsehood, and conceal the truth, while ye have knowledge. (Q. 3:71) · People of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that you used to hide in your Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary): There hath come to you from Allah a light [Muhamed (pbuh)] and a perspicuous Book.” (Q. 5:15) · …So fear Allah, and obey me [Muhamed (S) and the message he brought]. (Q. 3:50) · Verily this Qur’an doith guide to that which is most right. (Q.17:9) · Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel. To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the truth that hath come to thee… (Q. 5:47-48) · Say: “O People of the Book! Do ye disapprove of us for no other reason than that we believe in Allah, and the revelation that comes to us and that which came before (us)…?” (Q. 5:59) Allah the Most High instructs us: “Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: For thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His path, and who receive guidance.” (Q. 16:125) It is He (God Almighty) who has sent His Messenger [Muhamed (S)] with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) that He may make it prevail over all religions and enough is Allah for a witness. (Q. 48:28) Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of God: for God forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Q. 39:53-54) "Turn ye to our Lord (in repentance) and bow to His (Will), before the Penalty comes on you: after that ye shall not be helped. (Qur. 39:054) Br. zainool ------------- LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES! |
Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 01 April 2018 at 7:58am
|
Links: 30 March 2018 (Updated 30 March 2018) DOWNLOAD IT: ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH - part 1 https://www.dropbox.com/s/5zb35rfck1kx50a/1-ISLAM%20THE%20UNTOLD%20TRUTH%20%281%29.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH -PART (2) https://www.dropbox.com/s/8vqgmdszndo5a5w/2-ISLAM%20THE%20UNTOLD%20TRUTH%20%282%29.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH -PART (3) https://www.dropbox.com/s/87lbccszmmozke4/3-MUHAMMAD%20%28S%29%20IN%20REVELATION%2012.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH -PART (4) https://www.dropbox.com/s/iw7mcyzvzqk7h55/4-MUHAMMAD%20%28S%29%20IN%20ISAIAH%2042%20%26%20COMFORTER.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH -PART (5) https://www.dropbox.com/s/8f7fjnd236hjmaf/5-MUHAMMAD%20IN%20ISAIAH%2029%20%26%2028.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
THE CRUCIFICTION https://www.dropbox.com/s/cqptp4h22ya1siz/8-THE%20CRUCIFICTION.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
WHAT IS HIS NAME? https://www.dropbox.com/s/86uc6xyho5cdf5y/10-WHAT%20IS%20HIS%20NAME.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
DEVIL CHURCHCHURCH AND THE BEAST 666 REVELATION 17AND13 https://www.dropbox.com/s/pznevwiyjt7ikp0/11-THE%20FALSE%20CHURCH%20AND%20THE%20BEAST%20666.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
Links 2 (Updated 30 March 2018) ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH - part 1 https://www.dropbox.com/s/g19mbxa5orq380h/1-ISLAM%20THE%20UNTOLD%20TRUTH%20%281%29.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH -PART (2) https://www.dropbox.com/s/n5xqqfak1stqi5c/2-ISLAM%20THE%20UNTOLD%20TRUTH%20%282%29.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH -PART (3) https://www.dropbox.com/s/mg5ufgxwvwnssg5/3-MUHAMMAD%20%28S%29%20IN%20REVELATION%2012.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH -PART (4) https://www.dropbox.com/s/auhgrsnovi3qu0k/4-MUHAMMAD%20%28S%29%20IN%20ISAIAH%2042%20%26%20COMFORTER.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
ISLAM THE UNTOLD TRUTH -PART (5) https://www.dropbox.com/s/mh5stg4qpc7p52x/5-MUHAMMAD%20IN%20ISAIAH%2029%20%26%2028.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
THE CRUCIFICTION https://www.dropbox.com/s/cqptp4h22ya1siz/8-THE%20CRUCIFICTION.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
WHAT IS HIS NAME? https://www.dropbox.com/s/86uc6xyho5cdf5y/10-WHAT%20IS%20HIS%20NAME.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow -
DEVIL CHURCH AND THE BEAST 666 REVELATION 17AND13 https://www.dropbox.com/s/pznevwiyjt7ikp0/11-THE%20FALSE%20CHURCH%20AND%20THE%20BEAST%20666.docx?dl=0" rel="nofollow - Br. Zainool ------------- LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES! |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 01 April 2018 at 10:32pm
Hence, If Muhammad was the coming comforter spoken of by Jesus, then Muhammad must have been eternal, pre-existent, sinless, and Jesus must have been the one who sent him. Believing in such things goes against the Quran itself. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 18 April 2018 at 5:52am
Yes, Jesus was addressing the disciples, BUT, the ‘YOU’ was used not only to address the disciples present at that time, BUT it was also used as a general ‘YOU', meaning a reference to the future generations too. It’s the same when God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses in which was written, among others, ‘You shall not steal’ which obviously it does mean a commandment to Moses only, but, the general ‘YOU’ also mean to the future generations as well. In fact, if we were to believe ALL of Jesus’ sayings are only meant for the people of his times only, then, Christian today should ignore all of Jesus' sayings, as none of his words should be meant for the Christians of today.
Actually, Jesus did not really mean to say he will send the Comforter. In an earlier passage, Jesus said “And I will ask the Father and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever“ – John 14:16. In other words, Jesus was saying that he WILL ASK God to (and NOT him who will) send another Advocate/Comforter to the world. Jesus’ usage of “I will send” is the same as someone who say “Trump built the Trump’s Tower” or “Shah Jahan built the Taj Mahal”, which obviously we know they did not build those buildings with their own hands and sweats, but, because they originated the ideas, we said they built those buildings. Likewise, because Jesus said he will ASK GOD to send another Comforter to the world, he therefore, acknowledged indirectly it was him who will send the Comforter. So, no, Muhammad is not eternal or have a pre-existent life, BUT, he was the Comforter who God had sent to the world as promised by Jesus to his disciples. |
Al Masihi wrote:Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 18 April 2018 at 9:00pm
|
Jesus also says he will go up to the father and send the comforter, therefore claiming to be equal with God. We distinguish between commandments and other verses when Jesus was addressing people at his time. "You" means the apostles at his time, according to the Quran no one can send the comforter except God. The Comforter would come in the life time of Christ's disciples; in fact before they depart Jerusalem (Acts 1:4-5, John 16:7)------Prophet Muhammad was born long after the Comforter must have come, i.e. 500 years later. (ii). The Comforter is not a physical being and can't be seen ordinarily (John 14:17)-------Prophet Muhammad was a physical being and ordinarily visible. (iii). The Comforter would come from Heaven directly from God (John 15:26)--------Prophet Muhammad, with due respect, was ordinarily born in this World to pagan parents; grew up ordinarily, became an employed trader etc before he eventually became the Prophet of Islam. (iv). The Comforter, according to Jesus himself, was that Holy Spirit which his disciples Knew because he (the Spirit) was with them and was going to dwell in their mind (14:17)------------Muhammad never leaved with Christ's disciples and he was a physical being who did not dwell in the mind. (v). The Comforter would be with Christ's disciples and, of course the subsequent faithful for ever (John 14:16)----------Muhammad has died long ago allegedly of food poisoning. (vi) As Jesus promised, the Comforter came to the disciples before they departed Jerusalem (Acts 2:3-4)---------Like I said earlier, Muhammad came a distant 6 generations later. Mohammed is not the comforter. Also did the comforter came to glorify Jesus, Mohammed did not claim to be sent by Jesus nor glorify him, he claim to glorify Allah.
|
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 19 April 2018 at 12:14pm
What do you meant by this? So, no, Muhammad is not eternal or have a pre-existent life, BUT, he was the Comforter who God had sent to the world as promised by Jesus to his disciples. Will he be with us forever?
|
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 24 April 2018 at 9:35am
Sure, we can distinguish the target audience of ‘commandments’ and that of Jesus’ sayings. However, in John 14:16, Jesus was using ‘you’ as a general ‘you’, not just to those present. How do we know this ? Because the preceding verse (John 14:15), Jesus said “If you love me, keep my commandments”. Was Jesus telling his disciples only they must keep his commandments and future generations NEED NOT keep his commandments ?? Obviously that cannot be Jesus’ intention, which then tells us the ‘you’ Jesus used in John 14:15-16 was a general ‘you’ meant to include future generations.
The Comforter never came in the lifetime of Jesus Christ. If you believe the Comforter arrived in the lifetime of Jesus Christ, then tell me how did the Comforter guide them into all truths, and this Comforter will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell them what is yet to come (John 16:13) ?
The Comforter IS a physical being who is filled with the Holy Spirit or you can say, a man who has the spirit of truth in him. Jesus himself was also said to be the Comforter as he too was filled with the Holy Spirit and also said to have the spirit of truth in him – “My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate/comforter with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” - 1 John 2:1. So, when Jesus said he will pray to God to send another comforter/advocate, he was referring to another prophet who will come and this prophet will tell the world of the truth of Jesus’ teaching. Note also that Jesus said ‘ANOTHER Comforter’, meaning ANOTHER prophet like himself – it cannot be ANOTHER Holy Spirit as there’s only ONE Holy Spirit and that’s the Holy Spirit of God.
Sure, the Holy Spirit came from God and the Holy Spirit will be with anyone who do to the Will of God.
The Comforter IS NOT the Holy Spirit but, the Holy Spirit (which IS the Spirit of God) is the Spirit that made the man. In fact, you had your first breath because the Holy Spirit came upon you – “The Spirit of God has made me; the breath of the Almighty gives me life.” – Job 33:4. So, yes, the disciples KNEW the Holy Spirit but the Holy Spirit was no longer with the people, so, Jesus was promising them that when the Comforter come, he will teach them of all truths (John 16:13) and when this happened, the Holy Spirit will return to them.
Well, if you are a man of faith and only do the Will of God, the Holy Spirit will be with you forever and that’s what Jesus meant by ‘forever’.
As I said earlier, the Comforter NEVER came to the disciples. Can you tell me how did the Comforter guide them into all the truth, and that this Comforter will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell them what is yet to come (John 16:13), if you believe Acts 2 is the fulfillment of John 14:16 ???
Well, how did the Holy Spirit glorify Jesus if you believe the Comforter is NOT another man ?? Jesus said this Comforter will not speak on his own, but will only speaks what he hears – so, in Acts 2, did the Holy Spirit say anything ?? So, how could the Holy Spirit be the Comforter Jesus was talking about ?? As I said, Jesus was talking of ANOTHER Comforter, that is, another prophet like himself who will not speak on his own, but will only speaks what he hears and that can only mean the Comforter Jesus was talking about is Muhammad, who like Jesus, spoke only what he hears. The Comforter, who is the spirit of truth/Holy spirit, simply means that the man, the Comforter, is filled with the Spirit of God. In other words, this 'another comforter' will be another prophet like Jesus, that is, they are all chosen by God to be His representatives on earth. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 24 April 2018 at 9:41am
What will be forever is not the person, BUT, the Spirit of God and the legacy and teaching of the said (another) Comforter, Muhammad, just as the true teachings of Jesus will be with us forever. Likewise, my dad passed away long ago, but he’s always be with me in spirit and in his sayings/guidance. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 25 April 2018 at 11:18pm
|
The comforter had a pre existent life, is eternal, and will be with the believers forever. The comforter will literally abide with us forever and guide us, this is the holy spirit. The comforter would also venerate and glorify Jesus, Mohammed came to glorify and venerate Allah no one else, to suggest otherwise would be great shirk in Islam. The Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and Son and will speak their commands. Your interpretations are your own and aren't shared by scholars of the Bible. Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance. In 14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. Mohammed in his life never claimed to be sent in the name of Jesus, that would be shirk. Acts comes directly after John so is most likely fulfilling John. The Holy Spirit inspires the words of Jesus into the apostles so he is technically communicating with the disciples of Christ. Jesus never used the word prophet, never described the comforter as a man, and he said the comforter would dwell with in them, so its definitely talking about a spirit of sorts. |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 26 April 2018 at 1:44am
|
Hello Jerry Myers I have read your
posts and in response I make the following points. You need to read the Bible, particularly
the Book of Acts in its literacy context rather than just trying to put your
individual interpretation onto single verses. The “ Comforter” described by
Jesus in the gospels is obviously a specific, individual and unique being and not
to be generalised to all Godly or righteous people. You are wrong about
the Holy Spirit not coming in the life time of the disciples. It is well
documented in the Book of Acts. Read Acts Chapter 2. You will also note that
the disciples themselves were empowered by the Holy Spirit at this time to
perform miracles them selves. You are also wrong
about the early disciples not being taught by The Holy Spirit, s can be seen
from the following verses all written by the early disciples - “For all who are led by the Spirit of
God are sons of God.” Romans 8:13–17 “And as for you, the
anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you have no need
that anyone teach you; but as His anointing teaches you concerning all things …
John 2.27. You also have not responded
to Al Masihis point where he said In the Greek, Holy Ghost is Pnevma to agion
or agio pnevmato. The word Agion means holy. In other words, this coming being
is going to be sinless and pure. Yet, Muhammad is described as a sinner in
surah 40:55, 48:2, and 47:19. You state Jesus was
referring to another prophet who will come … a prophet like himself. You overlook the fact
Jesus saw Himself as more than just a prophet. He himself said He is the judgement
of God that will come at the end times to judge the world. This is how he
refers to Himself in reference to The Son of Man from the Book of Daniel. Hence
Jesus saw himself as for more than “just a prophet”. Both He and The Holy
Spirit are in a class apart from common righteous or godly people. Including
Mohamad. |
Posted By: DavidC
Date Posted: 26 April 2018 at 4:57am
|
The commonly accepted Christian meaning of 'the Comforter' is the Holy Spirit, which is God present within in man. This is largely an academic, theological concept except in charismatic or Pentacostal churches in which Christians speak in tongues or prophesy. ------------- Christian; Wesleyan M.Div. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 26 April 2018 at 7:34am
Yes, David, the Holy Spirit is the reflection of God’s presence within a man whose main priority is to do the Will of God. The Spirit of God CANNOT be present in a man who never do the Will of God. In other words, the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of Truth is synonymous with those of piousness nature. Thus, when Jesus said “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John 16:13), he’s referring to the arrival of a man of piousness character, that is, a man with the Spirit of truth in him. The concept of Trinity which was conceptualized long after Jesus’ departure, sees the Holy Spirit/Holy Ghost as an independent person who is also a God. |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 26 April 2018 at 2:12pm
|
Why do Muslims refer to the Bible to find something
about Mohammed but at the same time accuse the Bible as corrupted? If the Bible
was corrupted, why do they seek such a verse. They contradict themselves and
just pick and choose what ever verses suit them. Muslims are desperate to find
Mohamad in the Bible. But the fact is, he is not there ! Any way, how was Mohamad a "comforter"? He was a War Lord who lived by the sword, took women sex slaves and ordered his men to cut his enemies hands off and take their eyes out with hot nails ! No comfort there ! |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 27 April 2018 at 1:17pm
You do not understand what Jesus said the comforter is the spirit of truth who abide with us "forever" can you see truth have anyone seen truth? define truth for me. The Apostles of Jesus have received the spirit of truth on the day of pentecost, Did they received Muhammad? The spirit of truth is the Holy spirit so do not be confused.
|
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 28 April 2018 at 12:13am
Firstly, Muslims NEVER referred to the Bible to seek the truth of God Almighty, however, in interfaith forums, Muslims quote Biblical verses ONLY TO DIRECT the attention of the Christians to the verses of the Bible which they have misinterpreted to support their trinity belief. The truth is Jesus never preached the concept of original sin and trinity in his whole lifetime on earth. Can you quote any sayings of Jesus in your own gospels which you believe are references to the concept of original sin or trinity ?? I doubt it. Secondly, Muslims NEVER said the Bible is corrupted in its whole entirety, but, the Muslims claimed the Bible is a mixture of truths and lies. In other words, there are truths in the Bible but there are also lies created by the hands of men - "'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?”” – Jeremiah 8:8.
Where did you get that ?? Was that from some anti-Islam sites or was that from some ‘hadiths’ ?? Try reading the Quran to know the truth of Islam. By the way, if you think Jesus would not expect his disciples to draw their swords and fight for him because you believe he will not resort to any violence even for justice, then you are 100% WRONG ! |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 28 April 2018 at 1:00am
Actually, you are the one who is confused. The Spirit of Truth IS a reference to a person whose own spirit have been strengthened by the Spirit of God. In 1 John 4:1, Jesus told his disciples to test all spirits to know whether they are from God or not. Was Jesus asking his disciples to test the Holy Spirit ?? No, he was asking his disciples to test those who came and claimed they are apostles/prophets or man of God. Why did Jesus issue this warning and who came, not long after Jesus’ departure and claimed he was an apostle/man of God ?? As for the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), that was NOT the fulfillment of Jesus' promise of the coming of the Comforter, but, the day of Pentecost was the fulfillment of the words spoken by prophet Joel (Acts 2:16), So, DO NOT BE CONFUSED. |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 28 April 2018 at 8:31pm
John 7:39 Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified. A matter fact muslims do not glorify Jesus so how can you asumed Muhammad is the spirit of truth. Romans 8. There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. You think your Dad's spirit is with you all the time, but it is not so you are just using your own imagination and set up your own conclusions. You set mind on the things of the flesh. Act 2:33 Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 28 April 2018 at 11:07pm
| The Holy Spirit is one of the persons of God not a mindless thing hence why he is called he not it. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 30 April 2018 at 5:13am
What does ‘to glorify’ means ? It means to dignify someone, and in this context, to elevate Jesus from the false status people have placed him in. This was exactly what the Quran had revealed to Muhammad about Jesus Christ. To clarify that, let’s review what Jesus said of the Comforter/Advocate who Jesus had promised will come after his departure from earth. Jesus said : “When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: about sin, because people do not believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and about judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned.” – John 16:8-11 First, Jesus said the Comforter will PROVE the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment. And why would the Comforter need to prove to the world that they had been wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment IF sin, righteousness and judgment had been the main core of Jesus’ teaching and preaching to the people ?? And secondly, what did Jesus mean by saying ‘and about judgment, because the prince of this world now STANDS CON-DEMNED’ ?? The answer is, of course, Jesus was not referring to his own preaching of sin, righteousness and judgment, which are all true but he was referring to the sin, unrighteousness and misjudgment of the Christians when they took him as God or equal to God, and thus, indirectly accused him of blasphemy. Because of this, Jesus now stands condemned as those who commit blasphemy are condemned by God. So, how did Muhammad glorify Jesus ? In Quran Surah 3:55 , Allah said ‘O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme..’ In other words, Allah is saying He will save Jesus (from the crucifixion) by taking him up to Himself and clear Jesus’ name (of the falsehoods) of those (ie. the Jews) who blaspheme (ie. these Jews falsely claimed that Jesus claimed to be God) against him – a claim which Christians today believe and it was of this claim (which Jesus never claimed) from the people that Jesus said ‘and about judgment, because the prince of this world now STANDS CONDEMNED’. Thus, Muhammad (and the Muslims) glorified Jesus by clearing all the falsehoods made against him such as the blasphemy that he claimed to be God or equal to God and that he came to die for all mankind sin – in other words, Muhammad and the Muslims return the righteousness and dignity (from condemnation of blasphemy) back to Jesus, a great prophet of God who would never claimed to be God or equal to God Himself. But, if you still believe the Comforter as promised by Jesus had already come down on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), then, tell me how did this ‘Pentecost Comforter’ prove to the world was wrong about sin, righteousness and judgment ??
Firstly, Romans 8 was talking about ‘no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus’, while Jesus in John 16:11, was talking about his OWN condemnation, not about the people’s. Secondly, these are words of Paul, NOT Jesus. So, who do you follow – Jesus or Paul ?? Show me the words of Jesus that he came ‘in the likeness of sinful flesh’.
Of course, my dad, although long gone, will always be with me in spirit. In other words, he will always be in my remembrance forever.
So ? Acts 2:33 just said that the Holy Spirit was with Jesus and thus, his teaching, which the people are seeing and hearing, are not his own, but, they were from God, as guided by His Spirit. The ‘right hand of God’ simply means those who are highly favored by God Almighty. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 30 April 2018 at 5:15am
So now, is the Holy Spirit a person or a Spirit ??? |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 01 May 2018 at 2:57pm
You are wrong where you say Muslims never
refer to the Bible to seek the truth of God. Your Quran validates the Bible as
truth. For example- And in their
footsteps, We sent 'Iesa
(Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come
before him, and We gave him the Injeel
(Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat
(Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun
S. 5:46. S. 57:27 The Quran in 10. 94
states If you have any doubts in the Quran which I give you go and read the
Bible or ask those who read the Bible Thus, the Qur'an
sees itself as the guardian of the message of all scripture: To thee We sent
the scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and
guarding it in safety (5:48 MP/51 AYA). He [Jesus] said,
"Lo, I am God's servant; God has
given me the Book, and made me a Prophet." S. 19.30 (Book could be recitation as is the Quran ?) It is He Who has
sent down the Book (the Qur'an) to you (Muhammad SAW) with truth, confirming
what came before it. And he sent down the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel
(Gospel). S. 3:3 Sura 5:46 states
that the Injil was given to Jesus by Allah. Sura 19:30 and 3:3 then clarify
that the Injil is a book just as the Qur'an and the Torah are books that were
sent down by Allah. Original sin and the Trinity are
doctrines based on scriptural truth. Regarding
original sin there are several lines of biblical basis to the doctrine that we
are all born into the world with sinful natures, due to the sin of Adam. Refer to
Psalm 51:,5 Ephesians 2:2 -3, Proverbs 22:15 ,Genesis 8:21 and Psalm 14:2–3. Regarding the Trinity you need to know
that the word “Trinity” is not even found in the Bible. However the doctrine
exists due to such verses as Genesis 1.26 , Isaiah 6.8, Isaiah 42.1,Matthew 3:17, Mark
14:61-62. How convenient for you to say the
Bible is not corrupted in its entirety! “a mixture of truth and lies” you say.
So tell us then what is your criteria for determining which is truth and which
is lies. No doubt the verses that support a Muslim view are seen as truth and
verses that contradict the Muslim view are lies. And until you do so you have
no authority to quote from the Bible at all and pick and choose what suits you.
If you are going to quote Jeremiah
8.8 then you need to understand Jeremiah 8.8. It is clear Jeremiah was simply
rebuking the scribes for their traditions that led people astray. He was
not stating The Word had been corrupted. Consider these points - 1. Other godly men also had copies of
the Torah in their possession. Eg. the prophet Daniel. Plus other prophets
affirm that the book of Moses was still available during their day.eg. Nehemiah
8:13-14,18. This occurred approximately 430 B.C., nearly 180 years after
Jeremiah. 2. The Lord Jesus and his followers
quoted from the Torah as we know it today and never thought that it was corrupt
(cf. Matthew 4:4,7,10; 22:31-32d 3. Even Jeremiahs enemies knew that
the Law could never disappear. Jeremiah 18:18 4. If you read Jeremiah 36: 1-7,
20-32, 27-32.You will see that If God was capable of restoring the revelation
given to Jeremiah after it had been destroyed, then God would also have been
capable of restoring the original Torah. 5. Jeremiah said …“ If you do not
listen to me and follow MY LAW …. So how could Israel follow the Law, i.e. the
Torah, if it had been corrupted? Jeremiah
26:4-6. You asked me where did I get the fact
that Mohamad was not a comforter but a war Lord who lived by the sword? You
obviously do not know your own Quran and hadith. Read Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume
4, Book 52, Number 261 and you will see Mohamad had the men of Ukl or Uraynah
tortured by having their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails
which were heated and passed over their eyes, and they were left in the desert.
When they asked for water, they were given none and left to die. Your Quran is full of directives to
violence – “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress
limits, for Allah does not love transgressors”. 2:190 “And slay them (the infidels)
wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out,
for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter” 2:191 “And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and
there prevail justice and Faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no
hostility except to those who practise oppression”. 2:193 “Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible
that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which
is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not” 2:216 "Let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this
world for the Hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah, whether he
is slain or gets victory soon shall we give him a reward of great (value)"
4:74 “Seize them and slay them
wherever you find them: and in any case take no friends or helpers from their
ranks.” 4:89 "Allah has granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight
with their goods and persons than to those who sit at home "4:95 "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your
power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the
enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know,
but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall
be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly" 8:60 "O Prophet! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty
amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred: if a
hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the Unbelievers: for these are a
people without understanding" 8:65 "Fight them and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them
with shame, help you to victory over them, and heal the breasts of the
Believers" 9:14 "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" 9:29 "Say: can you expect for us (and fate) other than one of two
glorious things (martyrdom or victory)? But we can expect for you either that
Allah will send his punishment (for not believing in Allah) from Himself, or by
our hands. So wait (expectant); we too will wait with you" 9:52
Prove to me that Jesus that Jesus
would not expect his disciples to draw their swords and fight for him. And
please do not refer to Luke 22.36 as when Muslims do they only display their
ignorance. It was Jesus that said “turn the other cheek” and to “bless your
enemies”. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 02 May 2018 at 4:34am
| Do you understand what I said, person of God, not person like a human being, person of God not person like a human being. The persons of God are the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 02 May 2018 at 4:50am
| Glorify means worship or exalt, the comforter who is the Holy Spirit will guard the believers from sin, yes that is what we believe about the Holy Spirit. The spirit who came at Pentecost guided the believers, and gave them knowledge. How did Mohammed glorify Jesus, by downgrading him into a worthless prophet who Mohammed was greater then, or changing his name to Isa and making up lies about him. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 02 May 2018 at 4:56am
| In the Greek, Holy Ghost is Pnevma to agion or agio pnevmato. The word Agion means holy. In other words, this coming being is going to be sinless and pure. Mohammed according to Sunni Islam atleast, was not sinless. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 02 May 2018 at 5:10am
Sorry a book can either be reliabile or unreliable it can't be both, if it's a mixture of truth and lies then that makes it unreliable which means you shouldn't quote from it. Note the antecedent of "they" is those who are saying "We are wise, for we have the law of the Lord." Notice these same people are being said to have rejected the word of the Lord. This is very common throughout the OT - those who are claiming to speak for God but are not. Malachi calls them out, Amos calls them out, and Jeremiah calls them out. It was a recurring theme. Let's look at what John Calvin has to say about this verse: How say ye, We are wise? He afterwards describes the kind of wisdom which they claimed, The law of God is with us: and doubtless, to attend to God’s law is the way of becoming really wise. ... But as they falsely made this pretense, he says to them, “How are you so foolish that ye think yourselves wise, as though the law of God were with you? Surely, if so, in vain has the law been written; for ye shew by your whole life that you have never known anything of what God by the law commands and sets before us, and what the design of it is.” Thus Jeremiah shows by their life that there was no ground for their foolish boasting; for they gave no evidence of their wisdom. It is indeed necessary for those who seek to be God’s disciples to bring forth some fruit: but as there was among them so much impiety, so much contempt of God, and as, in short, their whole life proclaimed them to be wholly insane, he says, In vain has he prepared his pen, even the writer of the law; and in vain have been the scribes, that is, the teachers; for by scribes, in the second place, he understands teachers.” - (end of Calvin’s comments) Also your argument of Hadith rejecting is flawed since the only way to understand Quran properly is by the use of Hadith. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 03 May 2018 at 3:24am
Well, why would Muslims need to refer to the scriptures when the Quran already outlined the truths as you quoted above ?? All the Quranic verses you quoted tell us everything what we need to know about the previous scriptures. For example, Jesus is a servant and a prophet of God. It is only when Christians said Jesus is God or equal to God that the Muslims will direct the Christians back to their own scriptures which clearly said Jesus IS a servant and a prophet of God. Other than that, why would the Muslims need to refer to a Book that is a mixture of truths and lies when the Muslims have a Book that is all truths when it comes to who Jesus is??
None of those verses you mentioned refers to the concept of original sin. Sin, by definition, simply means to go against or to disobey the Command of God. Sin is also a choice you made, NOT by birth. Adam was not created with sin, Adam was given the breath of life, or, you can say, created, in the image of God, meaning, he was created PERFECT. Likewise, man too was given the breath of life in a state of perfection. Adam was said to have sinned because he disobeyed the Command of God. In other words, he had a choice to sin or not, but, he was influenced by Satan and he made the wrong choice. Likewise, man too had a choice to sin or not – it all boiled down to the strength of your faith to disobey God or not. Anyway, let’s review those verses you quoted : “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me” – Psalm 51:5 ESV This simply mean he was born in a world which was already filled with sin, that is, sin was rampant at that time. Similarly, a child born in a time of war could also have said “I was brought forth in violence” which would mean he was born in a world already filled with violence and not that he was born growling and holding a gun ! Then you mentioned Ephesians 2:2-3. Again, these words of Paul had nothing to do with the original sin, because, prior to that, Paul said “And you were dead in the trespasses and sins” – Ephesians 2:1. He said “And you were dead…”, NOT “And you were born…”. So, where did you see ‘original sin’ in Ephesians 2:2-3 ?? “Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him” – Proverbs 22:15 This simply means foolishness or lack of good sense and judgment are normally in children but good discipline can make them wise. So, where did you see ‘original sin’ in Proverbs 22:15 ?? “And when the LORD smelled the pleasing aroma, the LORD said in his heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the intention of man's heart is evil from his youth” – Genesis 8:21 Again, like Proverbs 21:15, the intention of evil begin from the age of youth, NOT from birth. So, where did you see ‘original sin’ in Genesis 8:21 ?? “The LORD looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God. All have turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one” – Psalm 14:2-3 The key phrase here is “all have BECOME corrupt”, in other words, they became corrupt, NOT that they were born corrupted or sinful. So, where did you see ‘original sin’ in Psalm 14:2-3 ??
OK, let’s review those verses you mentioned : “Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” – Genesis 1:26 Where did you see trinity in Genesis 1:26 ?? Because God used plural terms such as “us”, “our” ?? Have you heard of the term “Royal we” ? If you want to convince anyone that God is a ‘3-in-1’ God, you need to show the words of God saying He’s that or the words of Jesus saying that, NOT the words of other people. “And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.” – Isaiah 6:8 Where did you see trinity in Isaiah 6:8 ?? This was about Isaiah’s commission from God. The ‘Lord’ here referred to God, NOT Jesus. “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations.” – Isaiah 42:1 Where did you see trinity in Isaiah 42:1 ?? If this was about Jesus, then, it only shows that Jesus IS a servant of God and he was strengthened with the Spirit of God (I will put my Spirit on him). "And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” – Matthew 3:17 Where did you see trinity in Matthew 3:17 ?? Because God said “This is my son/Son, whom I love” ?? First of all, don’t be taken in by the CAPITALISED ‘S’ as in Greek or Hebrew, which was the original language the English Bibles translated from, do not make any distinction between CAPITAL and non-capital letters, they are all CAPITALISED. Secondly, the term ‘Son/son’ as used by God and Jesus in the scripture means servant and they are used synonymously with one another. So, Isaiah 42:1, which you mentioned above, used ‘servant’ instead of ‘son’, so, did Matthew 12:18. So, ‘son/Son of God’ does not mean God the Son, but, it means the servant of God. “But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”, “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sit-ting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” – Mark 14:61-62 Where did you see trinity in Mark 14:61-62 ?? Because Jesus said “I am” in response to the question “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” ?? The question you should ask yourself is how did Jesus understand that question. I will tell you - Jesus understood that question as “Are you the Messiah, the servant of the Blessed One?” and that was why he responded with “I am”. However, in Luke 22:70, when he was asked “Are you then the Son of God ?”, Jesus understood this as “Are you God the Son ?”, thus, Jesus responded with “You said that I am”. In other words, Jesus was saying he never claimed to be God the Son, it was only them who have been saying that (You said that I am).
Well, yes, the verses that are in agreement with the Quran were the truths, but, for your sake, let’s ignore the Muslims’ view or what the Quran said. So, the criteria to determine which are the truth and which are lies in your scripture is really simple – what are the truths are those that are in total agreement with what God Almighty had said or what His prophets had said and in the case of Christians, what Jesus himself had said in your gospels. So, if you said Jesus came to die for all mankind sin, then you need to show from your scripture that Jesus, NOT what other people, said or implied that he came to die for the sin of all mankind. Question is - can you ??
Well, Jeremiah 8:8 CLEARLY said "'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?”. The ‘lying pen of the scribes’ obviously is NOT a reference to their traditions, BUT, it’s a reference to what they have been writing which are edited or fabricated (handled it falsely). Of course, not ALL are fabricated as there are those that are truthfully written too and survived to-day but unfortunately, the edited/fabricated verses also survived till today and that’s why the Bible you have today is a mixture of truths and lies.
Well, you need to understand that hadiths are written by men and therefore, not all hadiths are true. In other words, like the Bible today, the collection of hadiths is also a mixture of truths and lies. So, one need to validate the hadiths with the teaching of the Quran, to know which hadiths are reliable and which are not.
When reading verses from the Quran, or verses from the Bible for that matter, you need to consider the circumstances of the time those verses were revealed, the contexts of the verses, the culture/traditions of the society of that time, etc. In other words, the verses of the Quran are revealed at a specific time for specific reason(s). For example, lets take Quran 9:29 which Christians like to bring up to show Islam is against all non-Muslims. The verse read : “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not acknowledge the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture, until they give the tribute (Jizyah) willingly while they are humbled” – Quran 9:29 On the surface, this seems like a command to fight non-Muslims until they are conquered. However, a fundamental principle of Quranic exegesis is that the verse must be understood in the context in which they were revealed and in conjunction with other verses delineating the rules of warfare. The event that led to this verse being revealed was that the Prophet (pbuh) had sent Al-Harith ibn Umair Al-Azdi on an errand to carry a letter to the ruler of Busra. On his way, Al-Harith was intercepted by Sharhabeel ibn Amr Al-Ghassani, the governor of Al-Balqa and a close ally to Caesar, the Byzantine Emperor and was beheaded by Al-Ghassani. This was the first act of Roman aggression against the Muslims that further led to the revelation of verse 9:29. Executing emissaries from other countries is a war crime that could never be committed by those who sincerely believe in God. Thus, the verse 9:29 was a reference to the aggressors as those “who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day,” because they committed this act of treachery – it’s NOT a reference to ALL non-Muslims. Likewise, in WW2, when the Americans with its allies were fighting the Germans, its common for the army generals to issue commands to fight all the Germans BUT was the command really to fight ALL Germans, that is, ALL German children, women and non-military citizens ?? No, the command was to fight only the German soldiers who were fighting AGAINST the US and its allies, NOT every German they find. As for “the Quran is full of directives to violence”, well, obviously, you do not know your own Bible. Personally, I always believe in a loving God, and NOT a God of violence in nature, and so, any verses in the Quran or the Bible that contains “directives of violence”, I would say there must be a logical explanation or those verses are read out of context. However, since you started this rant “the Quran is full of directives to violence”, perhaps you can explain to me these “directives of violence” in your own Bible : Kill all non-believers They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13) Kill People Who Don’t Listen to the Judges or Priests “Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12) Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God “Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. “ (Deuteronomy 13:13-15) Of course, there are more violence verses in the Bible, BUT, suffice for now. If you can explain the above 'violence command' verses in your Bible, that would be very helpful.
OK, I am not going to quote Luke 22:36, altho’ one may wonder why did Jesus tell his disciples to sell everything they had and buy swords instead. Hmmmm.. Anyway, if one never spoke of fighting, it does not mean one don’t believe in fighting. Jesus may not believe in unjust fighting, in fact, all prophets of God do not believe in unjust fighting, but I can assure you Jesus do believe in fighting in defense of the right cause. To show you that this is the case, let’s examine Jesus’ words - ‘Jesus answered, "My Kingdom is not an earthly kingdom. If it were, my followers would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish leaders. But my Kingdom is not of this world."’. – John 18:36 What is Jesus saying here ? Jesus is saying that he expects his followers to fight the Jews from capturing him (fight to keep me from being handed over), but they will not fight for him because he’s a man of God (my kingdom is not of this world) however, they (his followers) would fight for him if he was not a man of God but was someone with worldly interests (of an earthly kingdom) and they would have not handed him over to the Jews. So, Jesus, like Muhammad, do believe in a just cause fighting for the cause of God, that is, the Message of God he was preaching. |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 03 May 2018 at 7:37am
So you what you wanted to asume that Muhammad was more powerfull than Jesus. Isaiah 44:3 For I will pour water on him who is thirsty,
And floods on the dry ground; I will pour My Spirit on your descendants, And My
blessing on your offspring; Ezekiel 36:25-28 “Then I
will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you
from all your filthiness and from all your idols. {26} “I will give you a new
heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of
your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. {27} “I will put My Spirit within you
and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do
them. {28} “Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you
shall be My people, and I will be your God. Joel 2:28-32 “And it shall come to pass afterward That I
will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall
prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams, Your young men shall see visions.
{29} And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My
Spirit in those days. {30} “And I will show wonders in the heavens and in the
earth: Blood and fire and pillars of smoke. {31} The sun shall be turned into
darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome
day of the LORD. {32} And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name
of the LORD Shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be
deliverance, As the LORD has said, Among the remnant whom the LORD calls. Matthew 3:11-12 “I indeed
baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is
mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you
with the Holy Spirit and fire. {12} “His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He
will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the
barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” Mark 1:6-8 Now John was
clothed with camel’s hair and with a leather belt around his waist, and he ate
locusts and wild honey. {7} And he preached, saying, “There comes One after me
who is mightier than I, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to stoop down and
loose. {8} “I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the
Holy Spirit.” Mark 16:15-19 And He said to them, “Go into all the world
and preach the Gospel to every creature. {16} “He who believes and is baptized
will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. {17} “And these
signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they
will speak with new tongues; {18} “they will take up serpents; and if they
drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on
the sick, and they will recover.” {19} So then, after the Lord had spoken to
them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. John 3:5-8 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, 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. {7} “Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ {8} “The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
1 Corinthians 12
Gifts of the Holy Spirit
Brothers and sisters, I
want you to know about the gifts of the Holy Spirit. 2 You know that at one time you were
unbelievers. You were somehow drawn away to worship statues of gods that
couldn’t even speak. 3 So I want you to
know that no one who is speaking with the help of God’s Spirit says, “May Jesus
be cursed.” And without the help of the Holy Spirit no one can say, “Jesus is Lord.”
Did Muhammad anytime said Jesus is Lord?no. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 03 May 2018 at 7:51am
Well, there’s no such thing as ‘persons’ of God because God is not a person nor is He a part of anything. If God is part of anything, then He’s dependent on that ‘anything’ to be complete and thus, He cannot be the true ONE God. The Holy Spirit is an extension of God’s Energy and its through His Energy, that we said God is Omnipresence. The definition of trinity is - God is the Father, God is the Son and God is the Holy Spirit but the Son is not the Father nor is he the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is not the Son nor is he the Father and the three can co-exist independently at the same time and space. The flaw of trinity is that if they can co-exist independently, then they are 3 separate and distinct entities, NOT 1. God is not like a 3-man team in an Olympic Game, that is, ONE team in essence and with one mission and objective, but consist of 3 persons who can co-exist independently at the same time – that’s NOT what Moses and Jesus meant when they said, “The Lord, our God, the Lord is ONE”. Do you understand what I am saying ??
Glorify does not mean worship. Glorify mean to dignify, to exalt a person to a status of high respect. As I said before, if you believe the Comforter came at Pentecost, then tell me how did the this ‘Pentecost Comforter’ prove to the world was wrong about sin, judgment and righteousness ?? Jesus said this Comforter will not speak of his own words but, he will only speak what he hears. So did this ' Pentecost Comforter' say anything ??
Let me get this right – is it not the Christians who said Jesus was whipped, abused crucified and died on the cross ? Wasn’t crucifixion the most humiliating punishment of the Roman Empire ?? Is it not the Quran which was revealed to Muhammad glorified Jesus by saying God did save him from such humiliating death and cleared his name of blasphemy (claiming he’s God) ?? Yet, you are saying Muhammad downgrade Jesus into a ‘worthless’ prophet ?? Well, I didn’t know that to whip, abuse and crucify someone would mean to glorify that someone !! Well, that’s a first !!
How was Muhammad ‘not sinless’ ?? You are probably confused between a mistake and a sin. Prophets of God are strengthened by the Spirit of God, and thus, they did not and would not sin, that is, they did not and would not disobey any of God’s Command - that’s why they are prophets and we are not. But as humans, they could make mistakes. You think Jesus never made a mistake ?
Who say a book cannot have truths and lies ?? Take the book “James Cameroon ‘s Titanic”, which became a blockbuster movie. Well, that book contains truths and lies – the vessel ship ‘Titanic’ was true and that it hit an iceberg and sank in the icy water was also true. However, the love story between the 2 main characters are not – that was fabricated and a work of fiction to spice up the story. So, one can say the book 'James Cameroon's Titanic' is a mixture of truths and lies. Likewise, the Bible today is a mixture of truths and lies too.
Well, if they said they have the Law of God, that means they did initially have the Law of God. However, through time, they have edited some of the passages BUT they still claimed boastfully they have the Law of God. In a way, they do but, it was a revised version, not the original, as they have edited the Law of God. It was because of this, God told Jeremiah to tell them, “‘How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,” when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?” - Jeremiah 8:8 NIV. The phrase “the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely” tells us they did have the Law of God, but it was revised that is, falsely handled by the scribes. So, if you read John Calvin’s commentary carefully, he’s saying the same thing.
I never say we should reject ALL hadiths. You are quite right as the hadiths (the documented collections of the sayings and actions of the Prophet) clarify further the Quran. In other words, the subject of the matter in the hadith must first exists in the Quran and not the other way round. However, hadiths, like the Bible, are written by men who can be driven by personal or some other motives and thus, the hadiths too can be a mixture of truths and lies. So, one need to be careful when reading the hadiths and not take all hadiths as true. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 04 May 2018 at 2:41am
|
Yes there are such things as persons of God, what Moses said I correct we believe in one God. If I were to say that each memeber of the trinity is not equal inpower, each is divine in its own respect, or say that each as their own attributes, then that would make three separate deities. They can coexist independently each exist with the same essence, substance, and spirit, effectively making it one God. The comforter who is the Holy Spirit spoke to the apostles and filled them with its words, Acts 2: All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them. Glorify means worship, exalt or dignify something to a high respect is venerate not glorify. Also when did Mohammed exalt Jesus in his life he only claimed to exalt Allah not Jesus. Isa isn't Jesus he was a character based on Gnostic stories, made to parallel the biblical stories of Jesus so proselytizing Christians would go smoothly for Mohammed. Jesus willingly gave his life on the cross for humanity he said no one will take my life I will give it, its not humiliating that Jesus sacrificed put his life on our place, that fact that he could give his life for us is more noble and honorable then anything on this earth. Truly you Muslims blasphemy Jesus calling him a slave of an Arab deity by the name of Allah. We believe prophets can make mistakes and are capable of sinning, they are strengthen by the spirit of God, but it doesn't make them immune to sin. The comforter is described pure and eternal, this is not a human being being described here. The book titanic can't be reliable when it comes to history if it's a mixture of truth and lies, likewise if the Bible is a mixture of truth and lies then stop quoting from it. Read what John Calvin is saying and get any commentary to back up your claims of Jeremiah, John Calvin was saying those who right God's laws, but do not know them are condemned by God. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 04 May 2018 at 9:02am
Is that what this is all about ?? Jesus should be more powerful than Muhammad ?? This is not about which prophet is more powerful, this is about the highlighting the truth !! By the way, Muslims do not make any distinction between prophets/messengers of God because God Almighty said – “The Messenger has believed in what was revealed to him from his Lord, and [so have] the believers. All of them have believed in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers, [saying], "We make no distinction between any of His messengers." And they say, "We hear and we obey. [We seek] Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the [final] destination." – Quran 2:285
Well, all the above verses only prove what I have been saying - that the Holy Spirit is God’s Energy which will reside in those who do the Will of God. How can one be said to have the Spirit of God if one does not do and submit to the Will of God ?? Interestingly, you quoted Mark 16:18 above which read, “they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover”. Since I would assume you have been baptized, I would like to see you drink a bottle of poison and let’s see whether it by no means hurt you or not. Or don’t you really have faith in what was written in your own scripture ??
Baptism is just a ceremonial practice. What is important is what that baptism symbolize or represent. Baptism, as practiced by Jesus and John the Baptist was the baptism of repentance – a practice in preparation towards the kingdom of God. It represents sincere repentance and the seeking of forgiveness from God Almighty. Christians today change that to a baptism of acceptance of Jesus as God and Saviour and by accepting this, they are cleansed of sin by ‘his death’ and thus saved – a belief which Jesus himself never preach. So, yes, Muhammad was not in baptism as he only believe in sincere repentance and seeking forgiveness only from God Almighty. Likewise, why do you think Jesus teach you to seek forgiveness from God Almighty in ‘the Lord’s Prayer’ IF, by baptizing as you understand it today, you are already forgiven and cleansed of sin ?
So, to your understanding, calling Jesus ‘Lord’ means the Spirit of Truth is in that someone ?? And this understanding is based on the teaching of Paul, not even Jesus. Who do you really follow – Jesus or Paul ?? Jesus was called ‘Lord’ because he was a rabbi – the Jews called their rabbis ‘Lord’, so are court judges, kings, landlords, etc – they are also called ‘Lord’. If the Spirit of Truth is in those who called Jesus ‘Lord’, then, he would NOT have said, “Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” – Matthew 7:21. |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 05 May 2018 at 5:48am
THERE IS A BIG DIFF BETWEEN LORD AND RABBI THEN A SIR AND A KING MUST ALSO BE EQUAL. Let me give you some insite to your knowledge what does this meant? Jesus said "Truly I tell you among those born of women there has not risen risen anyone greater than John the Baptist Matthew 11.John certainly did see himself as great he did not see himself as worthy enough to baptize Jesus. This not a prophecy that meant their wil be a greater prophet after him like the muslim apoligist claim Muhammad to the greatest and last prophet. One reasen that Jesus called John the greatest was that John held the honor of bieng chosen by God as the forerunner to the Messiah. John's mission was to personally prepare the world for Christ's arrival. John introduced Him to world as the Lamb of God who would take away the sin world. Pardon was MUHAMMAD the forerunner to the Messiah answer no! Muhammad did not take away ayone's sin he led them more in to sin as anything else. So Muhammad's claims to be a so called Abrihamic religion is zero nothing just a waste of time. The Jews was the children and family and great great grand children of THEIR FATHER Abraham so they don't have lay claim by any means of who is who and Who is going to be the next Caliph. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 06 May 2018 at 8:40am
You cannot really compare a King to a ‘Sir’ or a rabbi to a ‘Lord’ because ‘Sir’ and ‘Lord’ are respectful titles, while rabbis and kings are appointed personnel. A rabbi is an appointed Jewish religious leader/scholar who is addressed by the Jews as ‘Lord’, just as a King is an appointed monarchy head of a country and is also addressed by the people as ‘Lord’. God is also often addressed as ‘Lord’ being the only one Supreme Creator. Being addressed as ‘Lord’ don’t make a rabbi or a king or anyone the Supreme Creator too – which is often misunderstood by Christians.
What insights can you give me when you cannot even differentiate a ‘Lord’ and a rabbi or a king and a ‘Sir’ ?? Anyway, let’s go through your ‘insights’ -
Well, those are words of Jesus, not John the Baptist. Matthew 11:11 reads “Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he”. So, how can you quote this verse and said “John certainly did see himself as great he did not see himself as worthy enough to baptize Jesus” when it was not even John the Baptist who said that ??
As I said before, Muslims do not make any distinction between prophets and as for Muhammad being the last prophet, that’s because he is, and so said Jesus when he spoke of ‘another Comforter’ after he’s gone. There’s no such thing as another Holy Spirit because there’s always only ONE Holy Spirit, BUT, there can be another Comforter, as like another prophet, and the only prophet after Jesus is Muhammad, who, like Jesus, only spoke what he hears.
Well, all prophets are chosen by God and all prophets are forerunners to the next prophet after them. So, what are you talking about ??
So, what about ‘Lamb of God’? Christians normally understand the phrase ‘lamb of God’ as a reference of Jesus to be slaughtered (that is, to be sacrificed) as they like to think a lamb as an animal that get slaughtered and ended on our plates and they believed John the Baptist, in making this reference, was also indicating that Jesus will be sacrificed, of course, not to be eaten, but, to die for their sins. But, was John the Baptist making an analogy comparison of an act of ‘a slaughter of a lamb’ to the act of ‘sacrificing for mankind sin’ when he said “Behold, the lamb of God!” ?? Of course, NOT. Christians are so obsessed with Jesus ‘dying for their sin’ that they totally missed the other aspect of reference to a lamb. Fact is, a lamb is a subservient animal – that is, an animal which is always subservient to and guided by its herder. In other words, John the Baptist was using the analogy of a lamb (‘lamb of God’) to show to the people that Jesus is someone who is subservient, devoted in pleasing only God, that is, he’s subservient only to God Almighty, just like a lamb is subservient to its shepherd. So, let me ask you this - why would you believe that Jesus preached about his death and resurrection when he had clearly said repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached (Luke 24:47) ??
Of course not, in fact, it’s the other way round – Jesus was the fore-runner to Muhammad and that’s why Jesus spoke of ANOTHER Comforter, that is, another prophet like him, who is Muhammad. And no one can take away the sins of others except God Almighty. Not even Jesus can take away the sin of others. Perhaps you don’t understand your own Bible.
In case you have forgotten, Ishmael was the first born son of Abraham, and the Arabs came from his lineage. So, yes, the God of Abraham is also the God of Muhammad and the Muslims. So, what's your problem ?? |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 06 May 2018 at 11:04am
| Rabbis are never reffered to as lord, if they are give us proof. The only person called “Lord” in the Bible is God himself no one else, even the Quran doesn’t call anyone “Lord” except Allah whom you take as the “Lord” of Jesus. I absolutely have no idea where you get your interpretations from, first of all your definition of lamb of God as an obedient servant would mean that all the prophets should have been called lamb of God, but strangely only Jesus is. If you’ve ever opened a Bible you’d know that Jesus forgave people’s sins pretty much for most of his time being a preacher. Also what does Ishmael have to do with Muslims not all Muslims are Arabs, unless your willing to say Islam is an Arab religion, your comparison of trying to make it seem Isaac with Judaism and Ishmael with Islam is a false analogy. Jews are both a people and religion, Muslims aren’t, they come from many different backgrounds from Arabs, to Europeans, to Chinese. Also not all Arabs are from Ishmael even the ones that are from Ishmael doesn’t make them legitimate of the line of Abraham. Ishmael was a ****** born of Abraham’s concubine Hagar, he is not legitimate. And Incase you try to point to that verse in Genesis 16 where it says Sarah was given to Abraham to be his wife, the word used in Hebrew that is translated in English as “wife” is simply “woman”, also the marriage of Abraham to Hagar isn’t mentioned either. |
Posted By: yandex
Date Posted: 07 May 2018 at 12:49am
Actually Allah has given a blanket amnesty to prophet Muhammad for all his past and future sins. That Allah may forgive you your sins of the past and the future, and complete His Favour on you, and guide you on the Straight Path (Qur'an 48 2) |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 07 May 2018 at 5:11am
Rabbi, translated from Hebrew, literally means ‘my master’. Jesus is a rabbi and thus, he’s often referred to either as ‘rabbi’ or ‘lord’ in the scripture. Jesus was never referred to ‘lord’ to mean he is God in the scripture, that reference is only by the Christians today. And you are wrong if you think only Almighty God is called ‘Lord’ or ‘my Lord’ in the Bible. Here’s some of them - Sarah called her husband, Abraham, ‘my lord’ - So Sarah laughed to herself as she thought, “After I am worn out and my lord is old, will I now have this pleasure?”’ – Genesis 18:12 Obadiah called prophet Elijah, ‘my lord’ – ‘As Obadiah was walking along, Elijah met him. Obadiah recognized him, bowed down to the ground, and said, “Is it really you, my lord Elijah?” – 1 Kings 18:7 Aaron called Moses. ‘my lord’ - “Do not be angry, my lord,” Aaron answered.” – Exodus 32:22 The son of Ahitub called King Saul, ‘my lord’ – ‘Saul said, “Listen now, son of Ahitub.” “Yes, my lord,” he answered.’ – 1 Samuel 22:12 Hannah called the priest, Eli, ‘my lord’ – ‘“Not so, my lord,” Hannah replied” – 1 Samuel 1:15
I don’t blame you as I don’t think you have any idea about your own Bible too, other than just listening to what your church and scholars tell you.
Maybe the question you should ask is – who else, other than John the Baptist, referred to Jesus as ‘lamb of God’ ??
Why don’t you quote the verse(s) that said Jesus forgave other people’s sin and I will gladly explain to you what it really means.
It’s not so much of whether Islam is an Arab religion, just as it’s not so much whether Christianity is an offshoot of the Jewish religion or Jesus is a Jew or Muhammad is an Arab - it’s about who Muhammad is. Muhammad came from the lineage of Ishmael, who is the firstborn son of Abraham and Hagar, an Arab/Egyptian descendant. See the connection between Muhammad and Abraham ?? Likewise, Jesus’ lineage can be traced from his earth father, Joseph’s lineage which can be traced right up to David to Isaac and to Abraham. So, can you see the connection between Jesus and Abraham ?? In other words, it’s not about religions, it’s about having the true relationship with the Almighty God and understanding His prophets.
So now you are ‘more knowing’ than God Himself ?? Can you show me from your scripture where God said Ishmael was an illegitimate son of Abraham ?? In fact, God never made any distinction between Isaac and Ishmael – they are both honorable in His Eyes. I am beginning to doubt whether you have read and understand your own Bible.
Well, the word in Hebrew means ‘woman, wife, female’. So, if you read Genesis 16:3, the Hebrew definition for ‘wife’ in both of the statements ‘Abram’s wife, Sarai’ and ‘gave her to her husband, Abram, as his wife’ is ‘woman, wife, female’ - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/genesis/16-3.htm" rel="nofollow - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/genesis/16-3.htm In fact, most, if not all, of today’s English-translated Bibles you have, interpreted that as ‘wife’, NOT ‘woman’. Only those who think they know better than God will interpret that Hebrew word as ‘woman’. |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 07 May 2018 at 11:09am
Galations 4 Tell me now, you who have become so enamored with the law: Have you paid close attention to that law? Abraham, remember, had two sons: one by the slave woman and one by the free woman. The son of the slave woman was born by human connivance; the son of the free woman was born by God’s promise. This illustrates the very thing we are dealing with now. The two births represent two ways of being in relationship with God. One is from Mount Sinai in Arabia. It corresponds with what is now going on in Jerusalem—a slave life, producing slaves as offspring. This is the way of Hagar. In contrast to that, there is an invisible Jerusalem, a free Jerusalem, and she is our mother—this is the way of Sarah. Remember what Isaiah wrote: Rejoice, barren woman who bears no children, shout and cry out, woman who has no birth pangs,Because the children of the barren woman now surpass the children of the chosen woman. |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 07 May 2018 at 12:18pm
Again you are confused cause you want to. Muhammad was not the Holy Spirit or any sort of comforter. Read and understand clearly. John 14:16 Before His death, Jesus promised His disciples that He would
not leave them as orphans. "And I will pray the Father, and He shall give
you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever" (John 14:16).
This "Comforter," Jesus said, would guide the disciples into
"all truth" (16:13). The Greek word parakletos is rendered
"Comforter" "Helper" and
"Counselor" The term denotes the Helper
or Counselor who is always there to give special care in times of need. But the Holy Spirit is more than a Comforter, Helper, and
Counselor. The Spirit is also an Advocate and an Encourager. From this we can
clearly see and understand that the Holy Spirit is the representative of the
Son Jesus Christ, even as the Son was the representative of God the Father. John 14:26 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the
Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all
things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. When Jesus said these things, these events had not yet
transpired. The Comforter had not yet come. Although Jesus was Himself the
great Comforter while He was on earth, the task of being the Comforter eternally
was the role of the Holy Spirit. Jesus was a Comforter to the woman who had bled for twelve
years. He said, "Daughter, be of good comfort for thy faith hath made thee
whole and the woman was made whole from that hour" (Matthew 9:22). She
said within herself, "If I may but touch His garment, I shall be
whole" (verse 21). But Jesus explained that it was not His clothing that
had healed her; rather, her faith in reaching out to the one Person who could
heal her had allowed that healing to take place. Not only did she have faith,
but she had also placed her faith in the right Person. At that moment, she was
delivered from her bleeding and her pain. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 08 May 2018 at 7:07am
|
“Lord” in capitals refers to God, it’s different from “lord” as an earthly title, Thomas call him my “Lord,” not my “lord.” Mark 2:1-12 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” Oh so your going to explain what it means, you meant twist it to fit your interpretatio with no backing from any commentary. Genesis 17: As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I will bless him, and will make him fruitful and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall become the father of twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation. “But My covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this season next year.” When He finished talking with him, God went up from Abraham. Abram didn't marry Hagar, as there’s no verse which says he actually married Hagar, Sarai demanded that Abram have a child with Hagar as a common solution to when a legal wife couldn’t have a child she’d let her husband sleep with her handmaiden. |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 08 May 2018 at 2:17pm
Hello Jerry Myers. I must say for
someone who does not believe the Bible to be reliable with a mix of truth and
lies you do seem fond of quoting bible verses. You are wrong where you say it
was Christians that said Jesus is equal to God. Jesus Himself said in John
10.30 “I and The Father are One”. You ask why would
Muslims need to refer to the Bible as a Book that’s a mixture of truth and lies
? I don’t know. However that’s your problem to work out. You tell me why your
Quran tells you to refer to the Bible when at the same time Muslims believe its
not trust worthy. Muslims don’t seem sure about what to believe ! Regarding Original
Sin you are only partly correct in your definition of sin. “Sin” is actually a
state of imperfection that falls short of Gods perfection. It is
more than just disobedience as you say. It is a imperfect state of being. In
fact the Bible states the whole creation is in a state of sin and the whole of
creation is under a curse –Roman 8.18 -22 and Genesis 3.17. The idea of the curse
is further developed where the Bible presents Adam as the first man, and gives
the Lord Jesus Christ the curious title of ‘the last Adam’ (1 Corinthians
15:45). All of the verses I provided corroborate this. Psalm 51.5 refer to life
being brought forth in an environment iniquity and sin. You state man has a
choice to sin or not and it boils down to the strength of our faith to obey God
or not. Im sure you will admit that in your life and in all of our lives there
is a predisposition to do not what we know to be right. No matter how many
Salahs you recite will ever change that. You need to read Ephesians
2.2 -3 more fully. “As for you, you were
dead in your transgressions and sins, which you used to live when you followed the
ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who
is now at work in those who are disobedient.” Again it talks the
ways of the world being sinful and about a power of sin in the world more
powerful than us making simple choices. It actually talks about the power of
Satan influencing mankind to sin. Regarding Proverbs
22.15 foolishness falls short Gods perfection and is “sin”. And the word for
“folly” here is 'ivveleth which actually
implies impiety or evil. Proverbs 22.15 implies
this state of sin is bound up in the heart of children. You are wrong about
Genesis 8.21 where you say evil began with youth. It states the “ground” itself
was cursed. The ground that supports all life. Regarding Psalm
14.2-3 you need to understand it in the context of the Bible as a whole and in
the context of my explanations above. People are made in the image of God.
People are partly divine. However ALL of mankind have become corrupt because as
I said earlier the curse that is over the world. People are born into a cursed world and
become further corrupted with life. All verses are to be read in literary
context, not out of context as you tend to do. Regarding the trinity
let me remind you the term “Trinity” is not found in the Bible. Christians believe
God is One. “The Lord our God, the Lord is one .” (Mark 12:29). But for your sake
lets pull this apart a bit. While God is One, you will consistently find is a
plurality with three distinct aspects of God identified. “Royal we”? Royal WE
is more accurate regarding Genesis 1.26. Plural ! Isaiah 6:8 is another example of the plurality
of God. Regarding the verses
already mentioned, lets discuss them further. Plurality is found in Isaiah 6.8.
“And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go
for us?” (plural!) …
Isaiah 6:8. Regarding the person
identified in Isaiah 42.1 it is essentially a Messianic verse that implies an earthly
ruler with divine qualities. This becomes apparent when read in the context of
the whole chapter and other Messianic verses in Isaiah and elsewhere. For the
purposes of our argument however it implies a plurality or extension of God
into an earthly ruler with divine attributes. You are wrong about
Mathew 3.17 as referring to a servant. The word used in the Greek is
“Huios” which means “Son” not
servant as you claim. While “Huios / Son ” is used in other contexts it means Son in the general context of the
offspring of men, and in a wider sense, a descendant, or one of the posterity
of someone, and in this sense, of God The Father. Regarding Matthew
12:18. This verse is prophetic and in reference to the earthly but divine ruler
referred to in Isaiah 42.14 which I have discussed above. But anyway read on. After
Jesus heals a demon possessed dumb and blind man … “All the people were astonished and said,
“Could this be the Son of David?” Mat 12:23. The Jews themselves were expecting
a Messianic figure being the “son of David which is part of the basis to the Messianic
Jewish / Christian doctrine of “Sonship”. Have a good read of
Mark 14.61 Jerry Myers and read on to verse 64. First Jesus states he is
the Son of the Blessed One (in this
context an exclusive Title) , then he
refers to himself as the figure of God who will return to judge the world in
Daniel 7.13 -15, and then the Chief Priests condemn him to death for the
blasphemy of making himself equal to God. Regarding Luke 22:66 it
needs to be read in the context of Mark 14 as discussed above, and the same
argument holds First Jesus states he is the
Son of the Blessed One (in this context an exclusive Title) , then he
refers to himself as the figure of God who will return to judge the world in
Daniel 7.13 -15, and then the Chief Priests condemn him to death for the
blasphemy of making himself equal to God. Matthew 26:63 says the same thing.
Jesus himself said: “I have come down from heaven.” John 6:38; 8:23. Even some of the
Jewish names for God imply him having more than one characteristic, for example
the names “Echad” and “Elohim” describe God in the plural (many). A Hebrew name for God is “Echad”
implying cluster,
like a cluster of grapes (plural but one). The plurality of God and God The Son is also found in the
Old Testament. For example - The third member of the trinity of God, The Holy Spirit,
is also found as an exclusive entity and extensively in the Old Testament.
Examples of this are found in Genesis 1:2, 1 Samuel 11:6, Psalm 106:33,Genesis 6:3, 1
Samuel 16:13. Further points I
would make about “ the Trinity” are that there is nothing new in your
doubting the doctrine of the trinity. These arguments have been common within
the Christian world and Christian history. There is a theological discipline
called “Christology” where Christians have been discussing and debating these
points for the last 2000 years. A lot longer than what Muslims have been
presenting it to Christians Also you don’t
have to believe in the trinity to be a Christian. My personal view of God is 1
but having many dimensions or being multi dimensional but at the moment there
appears to be 3 main dimensions or aspects of his Oneness that are being
emphasized. Finally you state
that if I want to convince anyone that God is a ‘3-in-1’ God, I need to show
the words of God saying He is that or the words of Jesus saying that, not the
words of other people. This argument of
yours is bordering on what is called a “straw man” logical fallacy ( a common
poorly formed argument based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's
argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that
opponent in the first place.) If want to follow
this line of reasoning, let me ask you. If Mohamad is the “Comforter” then you
need to show from your scripture that Mohamad said, and NOT other people said,
or implied, that he is the comforter as Jesus promised. Can you?? Regarding your
criteria for determining which is truth and which is lies in the Bible you admit Bible verses that support a
Muslim view are truth and verses that contradict the Muslim view are lies. This
is actually faulty reasoning and circular logic on your behalf and is also
known as a circular logical fallacy ( where the reasoner begins with what they
are trying to end with). Your attempt of an exegesis(
critical explanation or interpretation of a text) where you said “the criteria truth
in my scripture are the truths of those in agreement with what God or His prophets or what Jesus himself had
said is correct for basic Christian exegesis, but my point stands - you still
have not adequately determined your Muslim criteria for determining which is
truth and which is lies and until you do so you have no authority to quote from
the Bible at all and pick and choose what simply suits you. Your challenge to
show from my scripture that Jesus, and not what other people, said or implied,
that he came to die for the sin of all mankind is again also bordering on the
straw man logical fallacy . Any way Jesus often talked in parables but John
8:12, 12.24 and 2.19 are all examples of what Jesus said about dying for the
world. Again I challenge
you. If want to follow this line of reasoning, let me ask you. If Mohamad is the
“Comforter” then you need to show from your scripture that Mohamad said, and
NOT other people said, or implied, that he is the comforter as Jesus promised.
Can you ?? Regarding Jeremiah
8.8 it not saying the Word had been corrupted, it is saying a certain group of
scribes have handled it falsely. Consider these points - 1. Other godly men
also had copies of the Torah in their posses-sion. Eg. the prophet Daniel. Plus
other prophets affirm that the book of Moses was still available during their
day.eg. Nehemiah 8:13-14,18. This occurred approximately 430 B.C., nearly 180
years after Jeremiah. 2. The Lord Jesus and
his followers quoted from the Torah as we know it today and never thought that
it was corrupt (cf. Matthew 4:4,7,10; 22:31-32d 3. Even Jeremiahs
enemies knew that the Law could never dis-appear. Jeremiah 18:18 4. If you read
Jeremiah 36: 1-7, 20-32, 27-32. You will see that If God was capable of restoring
the revelation given to Jeremiah after it had been destroyed, then God would
also have been capable of restoring the original Torah. 5. Later Jeremiah
said …“ If you do not listen to me and follow MY LAW …. So how could Israel
follow the Law, i.e. the Torah, if it had been corrupted? Jeremiah 26:4-6. Regarding the
violence in the Quran proving Mohammad in not the “Comforter”. The reason I
quoted the verse in Sahih al-Bukhari, where Mohamed had his enemies tortured
with hot nails in their eyes was because you asked where I got my idea of Mohamad’s
warfaring nature. Proof has been provided. Sahih Hadith is integral to Orthodox
Islamic Sharia and always has been. You
are being evasive by minimising the importance of your Sahih Hadith. You state the violent directives and verses
in the Quran need to be understood in the context of the times. In saying this
you are implying the Quran is not a literal, eternal, universal, absolute
message for all people for all time ? ! Besides the point to all of this is how can Mohamad have been The
Comforter” when he was so inclined to wield the sword, torture his enemies and
instruct his men to take women captive sex slaves. You have not yet answered
this question? Violence in the Bible
? you will only find violence in the Old Testament not the Christian New
Testament . The reason violence is found in the Old Testament is that the Old
Testament is only a partial revelation of God. Jesus as the final revelation
and he preached Jesus preached to “love ones enemies”. As I said above. The
point to all of this is how can Mohamad have been the “Comforter” when he wielded
the sword, tortured his enemies and instructed his men to take women captive
sex slaves. You have not yet answered this question? In Luke 22.36 Jesus
was not encouraging His disciples to defend themselves through violence, which
would have contradicted His previous instruction, in Matthew 5:38-39, against
harming others,In Luke 9:56, and In
Matthew 5:44 “…Love your enemies, bless
them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which
despitefully use you, and persecute you.” Why did Jesus
instruct his disciples to get swords? To assure the fulfilment of the prophecy
in Isaiah 53:12. He was to be considered a lawbreaker or transgressor. You say if one never
spoke of fighting it does not mean one doesn’t
believe in fighting. Jesus never spoke of UFOs or flying pigs either. Did he
believe in UFOs or flying pigs ? and besides he did talk about fighting. He
said to love our enemies (Mathew 5.43) and to put our swords down and those who
use the sword will die by the sword. (Mathew
26.52). Regarding John 18.38
You have totally twisted and misread the verse. He is saying because His
kingdom is not of this world he does not expect his followers to fight.
You need to read it properly and stop twisting verses to suit your own world
view. |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 25 May 2018 at 4:40pm
| So we have established now that Mohammad is not the comforter. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 26 May 2018 at 12:52pm
My apologies for the very late reply. Had to do some business travels abroad the last few weeks and now it’s the month of Ramadan. So, again, my apologies for the late reply. Anyway, let’s go through what you have written -
Hello 2Acts, you obviously are so forgetful or just do not read my comments. Let me reiterate it again to you - we Muslims only quote the Bible when we WANT TO CORRECT your lack of understanding to your own scripture, NOT because we love to quote your Bible. Comprante ?
See what I mean about your lack of understanding of your own Bible ? Jesus was NOT claiming to be God when he said “I and the Father are one" (John 10:30). When we read this in context, Jesus was saying that he and God are one in purpose. Earlier, in John 5:30, Jesus implied that he and God are one in purpose when he said “I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me”. Anyone who said I seek not my own will but the will of God IS a true servant of God and he and God are one in purpose and mission. Moreover, if Jesus meant to say he’s God when he said “I and the Father are one” then Jesus must be asking God to make all his followers Gods or equal to God too when he said “I pray that they will all be one, JUST AS YOU AND I ARE ONE …..”- (John 17:21). “JUST AS YOU AND I ARE ONE” is obviously a reference to Jesus’ earlier statement “I and the Father are one”. Can you understand now ??
The Quran never told the Muslims today to refer to the Bible - the Quran was informing Muhammad if the Jews and Christians (in Muhammad’s time) doubt about the Message he brings from God, then they should refer to their own scriptures, which have the same basic Message. As I said, why would Muslims today need to refer to the Bible which contains a mixture of truth and lies ?
Sin is NOT a state of imperfection, sin is an act of disobeying God. A state can only be corrected or amended, not forgiven – only an act (of disobedience) can be forgiven. How can you forgive a ‘state of imperfection’ ?? Don’t listen to Paul, listen to Jesus.
You said ‘to do not what we know to be right’ ?? Shouldn’t you be doing what you know to be right instead of ‘to do NOT what we know to be right’ ?? No wonder you think Jesus is God !
You need to quote the sayings of Jesus, NOT of someone else like Paul. Moreover, it said ‘dead in your transgressions and sins, which you used to live when you followed…..’, NOT ‘BORN WITH transgressions and sins, which you INHERITED…..'.
Yes, it talks about the power of Satan INFLUENCING mankind TO SIN, meaning Satan objective is to influence you to sin, BUT you have a choice to resist him or not.
'Impiety of sin’ simply means lack of piety. Lack of piety is caused by lack of faith and lack of faith is caused by the inability to understand or comprehend God’s Message and inability to comprehend is normally found in children. So ??
That’s a figurative of speech. An evil man can be said THAT evil that even the ground he walked on is cursed. That does not mean you cannot walk on the same ground he had walked on or that you are cursed too if you walked on the same ground he walked. The problem with Christians today is that they took most of the verses in its literal sense and thus they missed the true message of those verses.
People are made in the image of God means man is created perfect, NOT partly divine. What does ‘partly divine’ even mean ?? Are you saying you are ‘partly divine’ too because you think you are in the image of God ?? All verses are to be read in literary context, not out of context as you tend to do.
Let me give you a tip in understanding the Old Testament – In the OT, God Almighty is also referred to as ‘LORD’ but, as you can see, it’s spelled to as 'LORD' (all CAPITAL letters). So, when you read the OT and come across ‘LORD’, its a reference to God Almighty, and when you come across ‘Lord’ (only the ‘L’ was capitalized and the rest not capitalized), it’s a reference to a human ‘lord’, such as a king or a rabbi, not God Almighty. So, in Isaiah 6:8 which you mentioned, it’s NOT a reference to the Almighty God, BUT a reference to a human ‘Lord’ such as a king, a rabbi, or someone who was highly respected and looked upon as a leader. In Isaiah 6:3, the ‘LORD’ is a reference to God Almighty. Also see Isaiah 42 where God Almighty is referred as ‘LORD’ (all CAPITAL letters).
No earthly ruler ever has divine qualities or attributes, that is, if your understanding of divine qualities means that earthly ruler is equal to God. As I have said before “There’s no earthly ruler with divine qualities, not even Jesus. Why do think Jesus said “I, by myself can do nothing“ ??”
Matthew 3:17 is a direct reference to Isaiah 42:1, where the term ‘servant’ was used instead of ‘son’. As I have said many times, ‘s/Son’ is synonymous to ‘servant’ in the scripture. S/son of God simply means S/servant of God.
So ?? Jesus was simply stating that he is the servant of God. As I have said many times, ‘s/Son’ is synonymous to ‘servant’ in the scripture. S/son of God simply means S/servant of God.
Well, you got that right - “then the Chief Priests condemn him to death for the blasphemy of making himself equal to God”. In other words, the Jews were looking for ways to kill him and they decided to FALSELY convict him of blasphemy, that is, they accused him of claiming to be THE Son of God when he never ever claimed to be one. In fact, in Luke 22:70, Jesus said it was ONLY them (the Jews) who said he was (THE Son of God) – “You said that I am”.
Sure, because he was created by God who is in heaven.
Jesus NEVER claimed to be THE Son of God. Who was saying ‘‘but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God’ ?? It was the Jews. The Jews knew Jesus is just a man, but because they wanted to kill him, they FALSELY accused him of blasphemy, a crime which carried the death penalty. In Luke 22:70, Jesus denied he was THE Son of God when he said “You said that I am”. In other words, Jesus was saying he was NOT the one who said that BUT they (the Jews) are the ones who are saying that.
Again, Jesus NEVER claimed he is THE Son of God neither did he came to die for your sins. If, according to Christians’ understanding, Jesus is God and he came to die for the sins of mankind, then the Jews and the Romans who killed him are doing the right and noble thing and should be rewarded in heaven for ‘killing’ Jesus !! Moreover, if Jesus came to die for your sin, he would NOT have said, “As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God”. Instead, Jesus would have said “As it is, you are right to kill me for I came to die for your sins”. Well, he never said that, did he ??
Well, having said all that, you STILL have not shown me the words of God saying He is a ‘3-in-1’ God, or the words of Jesus saying that ??
Sure I can, as God Almighty said so in number of places in the Quran – [Remember] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O Children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of God to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me’ – Quran 61:6 [Note: Notice that Jesus first said he's a messenger of God, then spoke of (another) messenger who will come after him. In John 14:16, Jesus also spoke of 'another comforter' - is there another Spirit of God if the Comforter is the Spirit of God ??] [And thus,] your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred, nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed, taught to him by one intense in strength – Quran 53:2-5 [Note: This is a direct reference to John 16:13 – “when he, the Spirit of Truth, has come, he will guide you into all truth, for he will not speak of himself; but whatever he will hear, [that] he will speak, and he will show you things to come."] “The Trustworthy Spirit has brought it down upon your heart, [O Muhammad] - that you may be of the warners in a clear Arabic language. And indeed, it is [mentioned] in the Scriptures of former peoples. And has it not been a sign to them that it is recognized by the scholars of the Children of Israel? – Quran 26:193-197 [Note: ‘The Trustworthy Spirit’ is a direct reference to the ‘The Spirit of Truth’ as mentioned by Jesus in John 16:13]
The criteria for Muslims to determine what is truth and what are lies is simple - the truths are what that did not contradict the Quran, which is the literal words of God Almighty.
I just did above, that is, if you read them. I am still waiting for you to show me where God Almighty said or implied that He’s a ‘3-in-1’’ God or Jesus said that he’s part of a triune God ?? Can you ???
Quran, like the Bible, contains stories, God’s Commands and lessons. The stories told should be understood in the context of the times, the lessons and God’s Commands are universal and eternal.
Where did you learn that Muhammad torture his enemies ?? From anti-Islam websites which quote 'hadiths'?? If you want to know about the true Islam, learn the Quran, not from anti-Islam websites. Again, I have answered as to why Muhammad is the Comforter Jesus spoke of. However, I am still waiting for you to show me where God Almighty said or implied that He’s a ‘3-in-1’’ God or Jesus said that he’s part of a triune God ?? Can you, without quoting the words of other people ???
You mean OT is not part of the Bible ??!!
Jesus is NOT a revelation, Jesus is a prophet of God.
No one said Jesus was encouraging his disciples to fight for the love of fighting. In John 18:36, Jesus did expect his disciples to fight and stop the Jews from capturing him. Go and read to understand John 18:36.
So now, Jesus did instruct his disciples to get swords ?? What happen to your earlier comment “In Luke 22.36 Jesus was not encouraging His disciples to defend themselves through violence, which would have contradicted His previous instruction, in Matthew 5:38-39, against harming others,In Luke 9:56, and In Matthew 5:44 “…Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” ??? Do you always jump from one ‘understanding’ to the other ‘understanding’ according to your whims and fancies when it suits you ??
To borrow your own words - This is actually faulty reasoning and circular logic on your behalf and is also known as a circular logical fallacy (where the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with).
The fact that Jesus did talk about fighting AND at the same time, he said to love your enemies means Jesus believe in a peaceful and loving relationship with mankind BUT, he also believed in fighting when fighting is the only logical option to defend your rights.
Well, that’s John 18:36, NOT John 18:38. Let’s see who have totally twisted and misread the verse. John 18:36 reads – “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.” You said because his kingdom is not of this world, he does not expect his servant to fight for him. You either cannot understand what you read or you can, but, you have totally twisted and misread the verse – and I will tell you why - First, let’s understand that his servants (his disciples) did not fight to prevent his arrest – that’s a fact. Second, because they did nothing, Jesus said his kingdom is NOT of this world, BUT if it were (meaning if it were of this world), his servants would fight to prevent his arrest. In other words, his servants did not fight to prevent his arrest because he’s NOT a man who seek earthly desires (not of this world) BUT he’s a man who only seek to please God Almighty. So, it’s not “because his kingdom is not of this world, he does not expect his servant to fight for him” but rather, Jesus DID EXPECT his servants to fight and prevent his arrest BUT because he’s not of this world, that is,he did not seek earthly desires, his servants did nothing to prevent him from being arrested by the Jews. So, who’s the one who’s twisting and misreading the verse ?? |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 26 May 2018 at 4:09pm
|
Hi Jerry. I see you are a expert in doing fault finding in the bible why? Simply cause you belief the Quran and Muhammad. If I say to you Jesus is God what argument will you have to proof me wrong? LUKE 2 And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon, and this man was just and devout, waiting for the Consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. So he came by the Spirit into the temple. And when the parents brought in the Child Jesus, to do for Him according to the custom of the law, he took Him up in his arms and blessed God and said: “Lord, now You are letting Your servant depart in peace, according to Your word; for my eyes have seen Your salvation which You have prepared before the face of all peoples, a light to bring revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of Your people Israel.” Isaiah 9. For to us a child is born to us a son is given and the goverment shal be on his shoulder and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor,Mighty God,Everlasting Father,Prince of Peace Was Isaiah lying in His Prophecy? What will your argument be?
|
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 27 May 2018 at 2:58am
| The meaning of one in the Bible can be determined from its context, in John 10:30 immediately after Jesus said I and the Father are one the Jews picked up stones to throw at him for blasphemy and Jesus did not attempt to rephrase or change what he said,so we know what Jesus meant when he said I and the Father are one, unless you agree with the Pharisees that Jesus Christ wasn’t God almighty. If Mohammed is the comforter you’d have to admit he proceeds from the Father through Jesus Christ, which would technically mean Jesus sent Mohammed with the permissionod the Father, this would be greater shirk in Islam to even suggest such a notion. If the Quran commands the Jews and Christians of Mohammed’s time to look at their scriptures because it still contains the same basic message then it can’t be a mixture of truth and lies, a mixture of truth and lies means unreliability and you’d have to admit that Mohammed commanded the Jews and Christians to look to a book with a mixture and truth and lies to find out about the message of Islam, such a notion contradicts the notion of Islam itself. Mohammed committed very numerous disturbing acts in his life from the disturbing sexual stories recorded in the Hadiths to the disturbing tortures he inflicted on his enemies yet he is still called th perfect moral example, I have no problem providing countless Sahih Hadiths to show you the actions of Mohammed. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 27 May 2018 at 2:59am
|
"I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 31"If I alone bear witness of Myself, My testimony is not true. 32"There is another who bears witness of Me, and I know that the testimony which He bears of Me is true," (John 5:30-32). The answer is that Jesus is both God and man in one person. This doctrine is called the hypostatic union. As a man, Jesus was under the law and was obligated to keep the law (Gal. 4:4). In His humbled state of being lower than the angels (Heb. 2:9), Jesus was cooperating with the limitations of being a man (Phil. 2:5-8). Therefore, He was in complete subjection to the Father so that He might fulfill the law and be the high priest sacrifice for our sins (Heb. 5:10). Furthermore, Jesus did not begin His miracles until His baptism. It was at that point that the Holy Spirit came upon Him. Therefore, Jesus was performing His miracles not by His own power but by the power of the Holy Spirit. This explains why in Matt. 12:22-32 when the Pharisees said that Jesus was casting out demons by the power of the devil, Jesus said that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. In other words, Jesus was doing His miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit and not under His own divine power which He had laid aside the rightful use of while he walked this earth doing the Father's will. Therefore, these verses do not mean that Jesus is not divine; but it does mean that Jesus, as a man, was completely and totally in submission to the will of the Father and that Jesus would only do the will of the Father as the text clearly says. Sources: https://carm.org/john-530-32-myself-i-can-do-nothing" rel="nofollow - https://carm.org/john-530-32-myself-i-can-do-nothing |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 27 May 2018 at 3:02am
| If Mohammed is the comforter surely you can pronounce atleast one verse from the Quran where Mohammed claimed to be Ruh Al Haq the spirit of truth, I thought the Ruh in the Quran was Gabriel, so who is the Ruh? |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 28 May 2018 at 2:54am
Unfortunately, the original language the scriptures are written in are NOT in English, but in Hebrew, Aramaic or Latin Greek, where there’s no distinction between capital letters and non-capital letters – they are all the same. So, Thomas, or anyone else, calling Jesus ‘lord’ does not make Jesus God as kings, rabbis and others are also called ‘lord’.
Again, this reflect your inability to understand your own scripture as you, like most of the Christians today, do NOT (most of the time) consider the contexts and the traditions/cultures of the people of that time when reading the scripture. Was Jesus really forgiving sin when he said “your sins are forgiven” ?? You should know that in the Jews society of that time, they believe that bad fortunes, illness, paralysis or any bad incidents that befall on someone happened because that someone had sin. So, in that society (even in some societies today), bad fortunes, illness, paralysis, etc. are synonymous to sins committed. In fact, the people brought the paralyzed man to Jesus so that Jesus can cure him, NOT to ask Jesus to forgive the man’s sin. Where in that passage that said they brought the paralyzed man so that Jesus can forgive his sins ?? After Jesus said to the paralyzed man, “Your sins are forgiven”, the religious leaders immediately reacted, "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (Again, it’s the people, in this case, the religious people, and NOT Jesus himself, who’s making the claim that Jesus is God). In Mark 2:8-9, we learn “Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? Which is easier: to say to this paralyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk ?’. Now, lets ask ourselves, if Jesus was really forgiving the man’s sins, then why did Jesus need to ask them which is easier to say to the paralyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk ?” ?? Obviously, in the context of that society’s belief, its easier to say “your sins are forgiven” as the paralyzed man believed his paralyzed body was because of his sins. However, we also know that with God’s Will and permission, Jesus was given the authority or power to heal so, in the context of that society’ belief, Jesus said “But I want you to know that the son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” Mark 2:10. Again, in the context of that society’s belief, “to forgive sins” is synonymous to “to heal” just as in today, the phrase ‘go and fly a kite’ is synonymous to “go away” and not literally mean fly a kite !! That Jesus was healing the paralyzed man and NOT forgiving his sins was obvious as immediately after Jesus said ‘the son of Man has the authority to forgive sins’, Jesus displayed his power of healing by God’s Will and permission, by saying “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.”. He did NOT say, “By my power, your sins are forgiven”. So, please, read your scriptures in context and also take into considerations the time, the traditions and the beliefs of the society of that time.
Well, there’s no verse in the Bible either that explicitly said Abraham married Sarai too, other than that Sarai was Abraham’s wife, which we all understood to mean Abraham had married Sarai. Likewise, in Genesis 16:3, we are told “So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian slave Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife”, which means Abraham had married Hagar before he slept with her. Moreover, I don’t think God would bless Abraham if he had committed adultery or bless Ishmael and made him a great nation if he was an illegitimate son. Can you show me a verse in the whole Bible that said Ishmael was an illegitimate son ?? I doubt it. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 28 May 2018 at 3:13am
Hi Peace maker, I see you are an expert in just quoting Biblical verses WITHOUT explaining your understanding of those verses. I don't seek faults in the Bible but just telling what the Bible is actually telling you. If you said Jesus is God, I will say Jesus is NOT God but just a prophet according to his disciples and Jesus himself. You and the Christians have not proven Jesus is God BUT only have shown the claims of other people, NOT what Jesus himself claimed.
So, how does Luke 2 above proves Jesus is God ??
No, Isaiah was not lying, BUT, the English Bibles translators, the gospelists, the church, etc, were. How so, you may ask ? Because the Hebrew word ‘el’ from which the phrase ‘God’ in Isaiah 9:6 was translated from, does NOT always refer to God Almighty, but can also refer to a human ruler. The English language translators capitalized the letter ‘G’ to imply Jesus is God when he is not. In fact, the Bible lexicon wrote the Hebrew word for ‘God’ in Isaiah 9:6 as just ‘el’, NOT ‘El’ - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/isaiah/9-6.htm" rel="nofollow - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/isaiah/9-6.htm A clear example that the Hebrew word “el” in Isaiah 9:6 can be used of powerful earthly rulers is Ezekiel 31:11, which was referring to the Babylonian king. If calling the Messiah ‘el’ made him God, then the Babylonian king would also be God. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 28 May 2018 at 4:12am
|
The Greek word κύριος is used which is always used to reffer to Lord as God. You can’t change the fact Jesus forgave sin, Jesus is confounding the Pharisees' skepticism by posing to them whether it is easier (He being the Messiah) to forgive sin or heal a paraplegic. He is demonstrating His authority over spiritual healing and physical healing, he did that to demonstrate His authority. Healing people of their illness is very different from forgiving sins. Adultery did not exist at the time of Abraham, Moses brought the Ten Commandments which forbidded sexual relations with anyone other then your spouse. It was not adultery to conceive a child through your handmaiden, as it was common back then if the wife could not produce a son she would allow her husband to conceive a child through her. Sarah is reffered to as the wife of Abraham while Hagar isn’t so we do know she was his legal wife while Hagar was his handmaiden. God would make Ishmael a great nation because Abraham wanted him to be blessed and prayed for him, however God said the real heavenly covenant will go to Isaac not to Ishmael. Genesis 17:15-22 God also said to Abraham, "As for Sarai your wife, you are no longer to call her Sarai; her name will be Sarah. I will bless her and will surely give you a son by her. I will bless her so that she will be the mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her." Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, "Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?" And Abraham said to God, "If only Ishmael might live under your blessing!" Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year." When he had finished speaking with Abraham, God went up from him. Genesis 21:8-11 The child grew and was weaned, and on the day Isaac was weaned Abraham held a great feast. But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, and she said to Abraham, "Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac." The matter distressed Abraham greatly because it concerned his son. Genesis 21:13-21 I will make the son of the maidservant into a nation also, because he is your offspring." Early the next morning Abraham took some food and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. He set them on her shoulders and then sent her off with the boy. She went on her way and wandered in the desert of Beersheba. When the water in the skin was gone, she put the boy under one of the bushes. Then she went off and sat down nearby, about a bowshot away, for she thought, "I cannot watch the boy die." And as she sat there nearby, she began to sob. God heard the boy crying, and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, "What is the matter, Hagar? Do not be afraid; God has heard the boy crying as he lies there. Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I will make him into a great nation." Then God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water. So she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink. God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer. While he was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt. If Christians don’t know their scripture then would you join Christian forums to test that claim? |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 29 May 2018 at 3:25am
The Greek word κύριος (kurios) means ‘The Lord’ which, as you correctly said, refers to God Almighty. However, the definite article ‘The’ is what makes ‘Lord’ a reference to God Almighty and not to other human lords. Similarly, the Arabic word ‘Allah’ means ‘The (Only) God’ and the definite article ‘The’ is what separate God Almighty from the other human ‘gods’. A good understanding of this is Matthew 22:44 – “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?”. As you can see God Almighty is referred to as ‘The LORD’ (All CAPITAL letters) and preceded by the definite article ‘The’. This tells us that Matthew 22:44 is saying “The LORD (God Almighty) said to my Lord (a human Lord, NOT God almighty)……..”. In Greek, both ‘LORD' and 'Lord’ in Matthew 22:44 have the same definition, that is, ’lord, master’ and both came from the same root word or origin, ‘kuros’ which mean ‘authority’ - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/matthew/22-44.htm" rel="nofollow - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/matthew/22-44.htm
Only God Almighty can forgive sin and you can’t change THAT fact. No man, including Jesus, can forgive the sin of other people. If Jesus himself believed he's God and he can forgive sins of other people, then he would NOT have taught his disciples to pray to God Almighty and ask God Almighty for forgiveness in 'The Lord’s Prayer'.
Adultery is an act of lust which already been there long before Abraham. What was yet to come was God’s Command or Law on adultery and this came in Moses’ time. That, however, does not mean prior to Moses, God Almighty condoned immoral activities such as adultery or fornication. It’s clear in the scripture that God permits a sexual relationship between a man and a woman ONLY after a marriage. This, if you read to understand your own Bible, is obvious as even Adam was referred to as the husband of Eve, which we can safely conclude that Eve was married to Adam before they had any sexual relationship. To say Abraham committed adultery with Hagar would be an insult to the righteousness of Abraham. So, let me ask you again, can you show me a verse in the whole Bible where Ishmael was described as an illegitimate son of Abraham ??? I DOUBT it.
It's interesting that you should bring up Genesis 17. Genesis 17 is about the Covenant of Circumcision between God and Abraham. This Covenant was made to Abraham and his flesh, that is, all descendants coming from him and this Covenant of Circumcision is EVERLASTING. It also said that any male who are NOT circumcised will be cut off from his people, that is, those of the Abrahamic faith, as they had broken the Covenant with God (Genesis 17:13-14). So, who told the Christians that they no longer need to be circumcised ?? Let me guess – was it Paul ??
And your point to all these is …… ?????
It’s not like I have never been in Christian-moderated forums before. Fact is, the responses the Christians gave are no different from any other Christian, like yourself, in any Muslim or Christian-moderated interfaith forum. So, does it really matter whether you are in a Muslim or Christian-moderated forum ? What matters is what is being discussed. Why would you even ask such a thing ? Are you feeling ‘victimized’ in this particular forum ?? I don’t see how as no one here is attacking you on a personal level or stopping you from saying anything that you believe in. Or are you expecting that everyone should agree with you ?? If you are, then, I think you should not be in any interfaith forum at all. If you are in an interfaith forum, then, you should expect rebuttals to what you said. If you think Christians know their scripture, then, prove it with logical and rational explanation of what was written in your scripture, not as to what your scholars, church, etc, have been telling you, which most of the time, do not agree with what Jesus said in your own gospels. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 29 May 2018 at 5:49am
|
Thomas also directly calls Jesus my God so we can tell it’s a refferenc to God. Jesus made himself subservient as an ordinary man when he came down to Earth. Jesus praying to the Father shows he’s subservient to the Father while on Earth. Jesus also said all authority on heaven and on Earth is given to him meaning he could forgive sins. Technically Adam and Eve were not married they are considered husband and wife because they are the only two humans created by God, incest and adultery weren’t considered immoral back then since when you think about it Adam and Eve’s children married each other although that would be considered incest today that was not so back then. No adultery didn’t exist at the time of Abraham, by Islamic standards what Abraham did would not be considered adultery since Hagar was the concubine of Abraham, the Quran dictates that sexual relations are permissible with a concubine if a Muslim happens to own one see here for more information: https://islamqa.info/en/13737" rel="nofollow - https://islamqa.info/en/13737 In Galatians 4:23 we see Ishmael being described as the son of the slave women while Isaac as the son of the free women. Ishmael was circumcised and was blessed by God however God says the real everlasting covenant will be established with Isaac not Ishmael. Jesus fulfilled the Old Law effectively completing it, however a circumcision of the heart of the Christian is taught. You said Christians don’t know their scripture if that’s true then you should have no problem debating more experienced Christians then I. |
Posted By: Niblo
Date Posted: 30 May 2018 at 12:27pm
As-Salāmu ‘alaykum, brother. As you know, Matthew 22:24 is taken from Psalm 110. In the Hebrew Bible this psalm contains two distinct words: יהוה (YHWH) and אֲדֹנִי (adoni). These do not have the same meaning. According to both Biblical and Modern Hebrew, the terms יהוה and אֲדֹנִי are neither connected nor related. The former is used only of God; while the latter is never used of God. In the Septuagint, these two - quite separate and distinct - Hebrew terms are represented by the same Greek term kύριος, and therefore the distinction is erased. You will know that Greek is an inflected language; this means that the form of certain words changes depending on how they are used in sentences. Have a look at the following examples from the Septuagint (I have placed the correct Greek words in their correct places): ‘Now Abraam and Sarra were old, advanced in days, and menstruation had ceased to happen to Sarra. And Sarra laughed within herself, saying, “It has not yet happened to me up to the present, and my lord (kύριος) is rather old.” And the Lord (kύριος) said to Abraam, “Why is it that Sarra laughed within herself, saying, ‘Shall I then indeed give birth? But I have grown old?’ (Gn 18:11-13). Here kύριος refers to both God and Abraham. ‘And Abigaia saw Dauid, and she hurried and alighted from the donkey and fell before Dauid on her face and did obeisance to him on the ground on his feet and said, “Upon me, my lord (kurie), be the injustice; do let your slave speak in your ears, and hear a word of your slave. Let not now my lord (kύριος) set his heart on this pestiferous person, for as his name is, so is he; Nabal is his name, and folly is with him, but I, your slave, did not see your lads whom you sent. And now, my lord (kurie), the Lord (kύριος) lives, and your life lives, since the Lord (kurios) restrained you from coming against innocent blood, and to save your hand for yourself, even now may your enemies and those who seek evil for my lord (kuriw) be like Nabal.’ (1 Sam. 25: 23-26). Here kύριος in its original form – and its forms kurie and kuriw – refer to David; while kύριος, and its form kurios, both refer to God. In the Tanakh, kύριος, and one or more of its forms, is also applied to others. For example: ‘Then the servant took ten camels from his lord’s (tou kuriou) camels and some of all his lord’s (tou kuriou) goods with himself, and when he had risen, he went to Mesopotamia to the city of Nachor.’ (Gn 24:10). Here a form of kύριος (kuriou) refers to a servant’s master. ‘But if the master (kύριος) gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and children shall be his master’s (ton kurion), but he shall go out single.’ (Ex.21:4). Here kύριος and another of its forms (kurion) refer to yet another ‘master’. ‘And Dauid said to him, “Whose are you, and where are you from?” And the Egyptian lad said, “I am a slave of an Amalekite man, and my master (kύριος) left me behind because I fell sick three days ago.’ (1 Sam. 30:13 20 Here kύριος refers to the slave’s master. Summary: When Psalm 110:1 was first written it was written in Hebrew - of course - and not in Greek; thus: מזמור נאם יהוה לאדני שב לימיני עד-אשית איביך הדם לרגליך. The unambiguous יהוה (YHWH) – used only of God; and equally unambiguous אדני (adoni) – never used of God; have been replaced – in the Septuagint – by kύριος and its related forms; words that are applied to both God and humans. Put another way: two words that never bear the same meaning – that are not connected or related in any way – have been replaced by one that is ambiguous in its usage. Christian translators and apologists have seized on this ambiguity in order to promote their theology. ------------- 'Sometimes, silence is the best answer for a fool.' (Alī ibn Abī Tālib) |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 30 May 2018 at 11:44pm
Are you referring to John 20:28 ?? If you are, then, was Thomas calling Jesus God Almighty ? Or was he just making an exclamation, like most of us do when confronted with something shocking and not expected ?? As for Thomas calling Jesus “My Lord”, surely you know that Jesus was a respected rabbi and the Jews called their rabbi ‘Lord’. So, Thomas said ‘My Lord’ because Jesus was a respected rabbi and Thomas exclaimed ‘My God!’ because he came to the realization that Jesus was not killed nor crucified. Wouldn’t you too will exclaim ‘My God’ if a good friend you thought was killed in a car crash 3 days ago, appear at your front door very much alive ??
Jesus is subservient to God Almighty because he was sent by God and submit himself only to the Will of God. Jesus himself clearly said so in your own gospels. So, why don’t you listen to him instead of listening to other people ??
The key phrase in this verse is “is given”, which simply means there is a higher power presiding over all mankind, including Jesus. So, how can Jesus be God Almighty when he had to receive ‘authority’ from a Higher Being than himself ??
Well, if Adam was referred to as Eve’s husband in the Bible, then, technically speaking, they are married to one another, although perhaps, the solemnization of their marriage was not as elaborated as today’s marriage. Fact is - there’s no reason as to why the Bible would referred Adam as Eve’s husband other than the understanding that God do not condone sexual relationship before marriage. As for “Adam and Eve’s children married each other”, well, that’s an exception as it’s the only possible way “to be fruitful and multiply” – there’s no one else they could marry other than their own brother or sister. You should also note the fact that the Bible, when speaking of a man and a woman relationship, always refers the man as the husband or the woman as a wife. This is clearly evidenced when referring to the relationship of Adam and Eve. Even Cain’s partner, who was believed to be his sister, was referred to as his wife – (Genesis 4:17). The message you can get from this is that God does not condone sexual relationship before marriage, even from the time the first man and woman were created and thus, Abraham’s relationship with Hagar was no different, that is, Sarah, who believed she could not bore Abraham any children, gave Hagar to Abraham as his wife – a fact which is written in your own scripture.
‘Adultery’ is just a term, but the act of ‘adultery’ has long existed and God does not condone immoral activities such as adultery even though the law forbidding adultery came later with Moses. Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because its people practiced immoral activities such as homosexuality, rape, and so on, but was there any divine law on such immoral activities in those times ?? As for the link you provided, was there mentions of ‘concubines’ in the answer other than in the questions ?? Suggest you read that link carefully.
As you should know, Galatians 4:23 are the words of Paul, not Jesus. So, who do you really follow and listen to – Jesus or Paul ??
As I said, it’s not like I have never been in Christian-moderated interfaith forums before and the Christians in those forums gave similar responses like any other Christians such as yourself. So, don’t underestimate yourself or the other Christian posters here. As far as I can tell, you are just as experienced and knowledgeable as any other Christians. However, if you believe the Christians in the Christian-moderated forum boards can give better explanations than you (or the other Christians here), no one is stopping you from inviting them over and engage themselves in any discussion in this forum. It’s always good to listen to other people's understanding of their respective beliefs and at the same time, perhaps, we can learn something new. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 31 May 2018 at 2:58am
|
Thomas wasn’t just making an exclamation he was talking directly to Jesus. Jesus is subservient to the Father because during the incarnation he took on the nature of a man thus making him subservient, same thing with the authority thing, it doesn’t remove his divinity. Jesus said all authority in heaven and on Earth, no one else in the Bible makes the claim. God didn’t condone nor did he forbid sexual relations before marriage, Adam and Eve were married figuratively as they were the only two men and women their at the same time, they were considered husband and wife, even thought they never actually married. Sometimes the word wife is translated from the word women. Abraham never married Hagar neither was it considered adultery Islamically as she was his concubine. A concubine is literally a sex slave, here is another link which says sexual relations with slaves is not adultery: https://islamqa.info/en/20802" rel="nofollow - https://islamqa.info/en/20802 . We’re able to tell what was forbidden in the beginning and what wasn’t, Soddom and Ghommorah were killed because of Homosexuality, Idol worship, and sometimes cannibalism. Bring me a command before the law of Moses which specifically forbids adultery or shows God punishing it before Moses. You asked me where in the whole Bible does it show Ishmael as being illegitimate, I did. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 31 May 2018 at 4:02am
Mualaikumsalam, brother. Thanks for the further clarification and you are absolutely right to say "Christian translators and apologists have seized on this ambiguity in order to promote their theology". |
Posted By: Niblo
Date Posted: 31 May 2018 at 4:13am
And how!! ------------- 'Sometimes, silence is the best answer for a fool.' (Alī ibn Abī Tālib) |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 31 May 2018 at 4:28am
At least we did not need a Tafseer to explain our scriptures to us. The Bible is saturated with verses that Jesus made claims that He is God in THE FLESH AND IN THE SPIRIT. Now, according to the Word of God: 1 Tim 6:15, Rev 17:14 and Rev 19:16, Jesus Christ is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Rev 17:14 They will make war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will triumph over them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and He will be accompanied by His called and chosen and faithful ones." The Quran also said Jesus the Messiah and and Messiah means saviour of the world and only God can be the saviour of the world then all muslims must reject their Qurans. Okay lets go just in sense of Prophet like lets compare Jesus to Muhammad just in a senseble way of comparing this two Prophets now, and see which one was the most peaceful man that walked on the face of the earth. Which one will you chose.
|
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 02 June 2018 at 5:12am
You sure about that ?? Well, if you are, that explains why Christians often read their scriptures out of context and misinterpreted Jesus’ words !
Yes, that’s what Christians claimed, and that only shows how Christians misinterpreted or read Jesus’ words out of context.
In context, 1 Tim 6:15 was referring to God Almighty as “the King of Kings and Lord of Lords”, NOT Jesus Christ. So, if you read from 1 Tim 6:14, “to keep this command without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ which God will bring about in his own time—God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords,who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen” – 1 Tim 6:14-16 Where do you see Jesus as the King of kings and Lord of the Lords in 1 Tim 6:14-16?? Really, no one has seen or can see Jesus ??? See what I mean when I said Christians like yourself, often misinterpreted or read their scriptures out of context.
The Book of Revelation was also believed to be written by John - you know that John who wrote the Book of John. John was the only man who equated Jesus to God Almighty – Mark, Matthew and Luke never did. If Jesus himself never claimed to be God or equal to God, why are you listening to the likes of John ?? I don’t think even Paul believed Jesus is God, although he may had believed Jesus died and rose again. In fact, the whole Christianity faith rests on this single belief of Paul, that Jesus died and rose again, NOT that Jesus is God.
Who told you ‘messiah’ means ‘saviour of the world’ ?? Can you quote me the verse which said that and I will explain to you how you had, as usual, misinterpreted that verse or had read that out of con-text.
How childish - it’s the kind of argument you can expect coming from kids who argue among themselves whose mother is more pretty !! Anyway, just to play along with you on this - if your understanding of ‘most peaceful man’ means one who will not fight or expect anyone to fight for him in any situation, then, you do not understand who Jesus is. Yes, Jesus, like all prophets of God are peaceful in nature, which simply mean fighting or to wage war will only be a last and an unavoidable option, in defense of God’s Name and Honor. This is evidenced as Jesus expected his disciples to fight and prevent the Jews from arresting him – they did not as they would not risk their lives for a man of God, which Jesus said, they would if he was not a man of God. After all, Jesus did say “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword” – Matthew 10:34. Now, why would Jesus even uttered and displayed such an aggressive stance IF he is ‘the most peaceful man who had walked on the face of earth’ ?? |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 02 June 2018 at 6:42am
|
Jerrymyers. How childish - it’s the kind of argument you can expect coming from kids who argue among themselves whose mother is more pretty !! Anyway, just to play along with you on this - if your understanding of ‘most peaceful man’ means one who will not fight or expect anyone to fight for him in any situation, then, you do not understand who Jesus is. Yes, Jesus, like all prophets of God are peaceful in nature, which simply mean fighting or to wage war will only be a last and an unavoidable option, in defense of God’s Name and Honor. This is evidenced as Jesus expected his disciples to fight and prevent the Jews from arresting him – they did not as they would not risk their lives for a man of God, which Jesus said, they would if he was not a man of God. After all, Jesus did say “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword” – Matthew 10:34. Now, why would Jesus even uttered and displayed such an aggressive stance IF he is ‘the most peaceful man who had walked on the face of earth’ ?? The sword is the word of God so don't run away like a child stand your man, who was the most peaceful Jesus or Muhammad? Muhammad phisically use his sword against his peaceful enemies. Muslim were always speedy to find a wee bity fault in Jesus but Muhammad is most perfect man that walk on the face of this earth. Same as the jews, Pilate ask them who do chose? they chose Barabas the murderer to be freed and Jesus to be crucified, now they the muslims chose Muhammad instead of Jesus, lo but we (mulims) love Jesus very much more than the Christians so throw away the Quran. such an aggressive stance How many wars did Jesus led in his live time can you tell I can only count to zero nothing not a single agression from him even when they killed Jesus innocently. Okay then you tell me what is meaning of Messiah and who is the Messiah in context? |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 04 June 2018 at 1:39am
You are wrong on the point of Muslims
quoting the Bible to support Muslim arguments. Truthnowcomes original post and
quote of Matthew 6:9, 1John.2: 1 and John 14.16 at the start of this thread being an example. He was not quoting it to correct Christian
understanding but rather he was quoting it to build his own Muslim case of
Mohamad as the “comforter”. When a Muslim argument is based on inferring a Christian scripture to be
truth (as Truthnowcomes) has done in this instance they create an unsound foundation to their argument due to
not adequately determining criteria for “truth and lies.” And until Muslims do so they have no
authority to quote from the Bible at all by simply picking and choosing what
suits. And no the circular argument logical fallacy of “truth being what lines
up with the Quran is not good enough.”
You are not correct with John 10.30
in Jesus saying Jesus and God were one in “purpose”. Cross reference to John
15.5 where Jesus said "I am the vine; you are the branches.
If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you
can do nothing… Obviously this is about being one in substance, not merely
one in purpose.
Once again your quote of John 5.30
has been taken out of context. Read back to John 5.24 through to 5.30 and you
will note Jesus claiming far more than just being “one in purpose”. He actually
claims he will judge the earth as Son of God and raise the dead. He takes this
further in John 11.25 where he said "I am the resurrection and the life.
The one who believes in me will live, even though they die… Obviously far
more here thanjust being “one in purpose”, but rather being one in substance.
And yes you are partly correct in
saying “anyone who said I seek not my own will but the will of God IS a true
servant of God and he and God are one in purpose and mission. Only partly
correct because they will become “sons” (small “s”) of God (in substance,
not just purpose) through adoption though The Son (Capital S ) of God.
Again you are partly correct in
saying “ if Jesus meant to say he’s God when he said “I and the Father are one”
then Jesus must be asking God to make all his followers Gods or equal to God
too when he said “I pray that they will all be one, Just as you and I are one
(John 17.21).” As stated above you are only partly correct because his
followers will become “sons” (small “s”) of God (in substance, not just
purpose) through adoption though The Son (Capital S ) of God. To clarify this further when Jesus
quoted Psalm 82.6 (John 10.34.) … Jesus answered them, "Isn't it written
in your law, I said, you are gods? That’s why it should not be so
difficult for people to understand the divinity of Jesus as The Son of
God. You also Jerry can become a “son of
God”. Suras 5:46. S. 57:27, 10.
94, 5:48, 3:3 make it clear. The Injeel (Gospels are God inspired and
true and its enough of an indirect injunction for any Muslim (not just
validating for Christians and Jews) to regard them seriously. And just
highlighting the Muslim confusion on this point further, is the fact that the
Injeel is not actually the same basic message as the Quran as you claim. Good
luck sorting out the “truth and lies”! Your definition of sin being not a
state of imperfection but rather act of disobeying God is a Muslim definition.
That is not relevant to this discussion as it is the Christian view of sin that
is being discussed.
You remark no wonder I think Jesus
was God. No, God the Son actually !
Regarding Ephesians 2.2 the point
being the ruler of the kingdom of the air (Satan) is at work. It is not a 50
/50 playing field where simple choices determine righteousness. The cards are
stacked. But any way as it’s the words of Jesus
you require in Luke 11.13 he said-
If you then, who are
evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the
Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him? (Lk 11:13)
The Greek expression poneroi
hyparchontes. Poneroi is defined in the Greek lexicon as “bad, of a bad nature
or condition.” And hyparchontes is translated as “from the very beginning” or
“being inherently.” Of coarse we all make choices around
sin. However the Christian view of original sin (which is what you wanted
evidence for and of which I have adequately provide) clarifies there is a power
of sin in the world that influences humanity. Its not a straight 50 / 50 decision.
Also as Jesus also validated the Old
Testament the Old Testament verses are worthy of further discussion.
The words “Ivveleth” in Proverbs
22.15 is clear in its context. A lack of piety is evil. And as Proverbs 22.15
implies, it is bound up in the heart of children. Your interpretation is simply
rambling conjecture departing from the inherent meaning of the verse.
Regarding Genesis 8.21 again your
interpretation is simply rambling conjecture departing from the inherent
meaning of the verse. The verse is clear. A curse resides on the earth. It appears everything is a figure of speech
for you to the point reality can be anything you choose.
In terms of people made in the image
of God it means partly divine. Genesis 1.27,Jesus quoted Psalm 82.6 when he
said in John 10.34. Jesus answered them,
"Isn't it written in your law, I said, you are gods? That’s why
it should not be so difficult for people to understand the divinity of Jesus as
The Son of God. Am I partly divine ?
Yes. All humans are, as opposed to other animals. Humans are distinct from
animals in that we are made in the image of God while animals are not. But the original
point to all of this is Psalm 14.2-3 where people are born into a cursed world
and become further corrupted with life.
Regarding Isaiah 6.8 you have
completely missed or evaded the point. The point the plurality of God. “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”
(plural!) … Isaiah 6:8.
Your points about Lord with small L
or large L would be far clearer if you were to develop the Hebrew where the
different terms of Lord being “Yahweh” and “adonai.” However that is best left
for further discussion as the primary point of discussion here being about the
plurality of God.
Actually you are wrong when you say
no earthly ruler ever has divine qualities or attributes. There is One who
perfectly fits with Isaiah 42.1, that being Christ Jesus, The Messiah. His life
fits perfectly with Isaiah 42. You tell me who Isaiah 42 refers to. Certainly
not Mohamad that’s for sure.
I repeat you are wrong about Mathew
3.17 as referring to a servant. The word used in the Greek is “Huios” which
means “Son” not servant as you claim. While “Huios / Son ” is used in other
con-texts it means Son in the general context of the offspring of men, and in a
wider sense, a descendant, or one of the posterity of someone, and in this
sense, of God The Father.
In terms of Luke 22.66 you claim the
Chief Priests “ falsely “ convict him of blasphemy. You need to prove your
claim. The verses are clear, the Chief Priests genuinely believed what they
were doing was convicting a blasphemer. You need to prove differently from the
scriptures as opposed to vague conjecture on your part.
And in terms of your statement he
never claimed to be The Son of God it is
clear in Luke 22.66 and Mark 14 He said he is the Son of the Blessed One (in
this context an exclusive Title) , and he refers to himself as the figure of
God who will return to judge the world in Daniel 7.13 -15,
With your point on Luke 22.70 it needs
to be understood in the context of the whole story. Jesus knew the Sanhedrin
were mocking and cynical and because of this throughout this whole incident he
refused to answer them directly. If you cross reference to Mathew 27.11 -14 you
will see the same lack of directness. However the point being that both Pilate
and the Sanhedrin all took it as a lack of denial from Jesus that he was making
Himself equal to God. It was enough for them all to have him condemned.
Regarding John 6:38; 8:23 Jesus
himself said: “I have come down from heaven.”. So when you say he was created
by God who is in heaven, it means – He came down from heaven. Non created as
humans are on the earth. Not created like a son of Adam. John 6.38 and 8.23
imply pre-eminence John in his gospel consistently stresses the preeminent
nature of Jesus as the preeminent Word of God throughout his gospel. You need
to stick with the literary context and read the whole Gospel and you will see
this for yourself.
There is some truth in what you say
in that if Jesus came to die for the
sins of mankind, then the Jews and the Romans who killed him were doing the
noble thing and should be rewarded in heaven for him. In a way they were
conforming themselves to Gods will and it wont be held against them. Jesus
himself said on the cross they are forgiven as they do not know what they do.
And if you look at Pilates attitude through out the trial he comes across as
righteous.
Jesus was very clear in Mathew 16.21
that he must die as per Gods purpose. He made it clear to those who were of
understanding. As I have said in terms of the Chief Priests he refused any precise
clarification to them due to their mocking cynicism.
]I asked you to show from your scripture
that Mohamad said, and NOT other people said, or implied, that he is the
comforter as Jesus promised. You have not adequately done so from the Quran
verses you have quoted. There is nothing in where you have quoted from the Quran
where either Allah or Mohamad directly said “ I, Mohamad am the Comforter as
promised by Jesus”. Considering Mohamad came after Jesus it would have been reasonable
for him to directly identify himself as “The Comforter”. So until you provide
direct evidence that Mohamad said this all of your arguments requiring direct
words from Jesus to do with the trinity or original sin are logical fallacy of
special pleading.
Its also interesting to note you have
contradicted yourself in your motive for quoting Bible verses. Up to now your
rationale for quoting the bible is to “ -
only quote the Bible when we want to correct your lack of understanding
to your own scripture.” However just like Truthnowcome you have used John 14:16
and John 16:13 to support an Islamic proposition ! As I said you have
contradicted yourself plus because you have not yet identified how to determine
the difference in “truth and lies” in the Bible you have no authority to quote
from the Bible for your argument. And don’t give me the circular logic fallacy
argument that “what ever lines up with the Quran”. The circular logic failing
of this argument has already been pointed out to you.
You claim I have not shown you the
words of God saying He is a ‘3-in-1’ God, or the words of Jesus saying that. As
I have just said in the light you have not done so with Mohamad saying he was
the comforter, this is special pleading on your behalf. But just to play your
game I repeat the ‘trinity” is not
directly mentioned in the Bible and is a mere doctrine only. However Jesus
consistently validated the Old Testament and it is adequately attested to in
the Old Testament verses I have provided.
You say the criteria for Muslims to
determine what is truth and what are lies are what that does not contradict the
Quran. Once again you fall into the pit of the logical fallacy of circular
reasoning .ie. ( the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with).
You need to do better than this. My point stands - you still have not
adequately determined your Muslim criteria for determining which is “truth and
which is lies”. Until Muslims do so they have no authority to quote from the
Bible and simply pick and choose what suits.
You say the Quran, like the Bible,
contains stories, God’s Commands and lessons that should be understood in the
context of the times. While you claim these are universal and eternal however
you are wrong. Christians do not believe the Bible to be a direct and word for
word literal Word of God. Rather Christians see the Bible as the “inspired” Word
of God written by men in the cultural and historical context in which the
writings were produced. It is the broad principles of revelation that are timeless
and eternal. That is not how Muslims see the Quran. Muslims see the Quran as a word
for word, direct and literal recitation of Gods word in absolute form. Because
you state the violent directives and verses in the Quran need to be understood
in the context of the times you are implying the Quran is not a literal,
eternal, universal, absolute message for all people for all time.
You ask where did I learn that
Muhammad tortured his enemies. As I have said it is attested to in Sahih
al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 261. And don’t try to say the Sahih
hadith are not reliable. Hadith and Sahih hadith in particular have been a
primary source of Islamic jurisprudence for centuries. So don’t try to evade
the point by saying hadith is not reliable.
Regarding violence in the Old
Testament, you ask is not the Old Testament part of the Bible? As I explained
the Old Testament is only a partial revelation of Gods nature. Jesus as
revealed in the New Testament is the final revelation and Jesus preached to
“love ones enemies”. This command to love is the final and full revelation of
God.
Christians believe Jesus to be a
“revelation”. But whether you believe him to be or not is besides the point.
The fact remains his message was about “loving ones enemy”. You will not find
anywhere where he ordered his followers to violence.
Regarding Luke 22.36 there is no contradiction
with Mathew 5.38, Luke 9.56 and Mathew 5.54. The reason being as I already
explained to you, but I will explain it to you again. In 22.26 Jesus instructed
his disciples to get swords simply to assure the fulfilment of the prophecy in
Isaiah 53:12 as per the prophecy he was to be considered a lawbreaker or
transgressor.
As a side note you should read Luke
22.36 in the context of Isaiah 53. You will note Jesus claims to be the Messiah
who will … he will bear their iniquities
... bear the sins of many, and made intercession for the transgressors ... He obviously was more than just a mere
prophet.
You were the one who started the
faulty line of reasoning (fallacy of omission) by stating because Jesus never
spoke of fighting it does not mean one doesn’t believe in fighting. My mention
of UFOs and flying pigs was simply illustrating the futility of
your logic through satire. You need to take responsibility for your faulty
logic or keep a better track of your posts.
Have a good read of what I said Jesus
talked about fighting when he said to love our enemies (Mathew 5.43). you are
either not reading my replies properly or again being evasive.
Lets break your reasoning down
regarding John 18.36 (yes 36, not 38, a mere typo). This will be a helpful
exercise to illustrate your bizarre and disingenuous logic. You get things correct
through to your second point where you state because they did nothing, Jesus
said his kingdom is NOT of this world. Here your logic deviates through a
logical fallacy of a non Sequitur –(meaning literally, "It does not
follow”). Healthy logic dictates they didn’t fight because Jesus never set an
example and gave them instruction to not fight.
Then you partly recover again in
stating BUT if it were (his kingdom), his servants would fight to prevent his
arrest. My advice Jerry is forget the “BUT “ as we all know anything after but
is ‘BS’. Your use of hypotheticals are one of your techniques that lead your arguments
into disingenuous confusion.
Any way. Unfortunately, you then go
on to use a triple negative as a means to confuse your audience (and yourself)
even further, in stating – it’s not “because his kingdom is not
of this world, he does not expect his servant to fight for him ,and then
you finish with a fantastic backward flip of logical gymnastics in saying- but
rather, Jesus DID EXPECT his servants to fight and prevent his arrest.
Excellent Jerry! A beautiful fallacy of ambiguity. Well done ! Really, if you
are to be taken seriously in the area of apologetics you need to be doing a lot
better than this. If indeed Im correct and you purposely employ these smoke
screen tactics to confuse, mislead and twist then you have no place on this
forum. Just read John 36 honestly, and you will plainly see he is saying
because His kingdom is not of this world he does not expect his followers to
fight. Its quite simple really. Just quit the denial, evasion and riddles.
|
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 04 June 2018 at 1:42am
Hello Niblo You are not correct that Adonai is
never used of God. Please see Genesis 18.27, Joshua 3:11, Isaiah 10.16 and
10.33 and Genesis 15:2. Adoni can refer to God as lord or a human as lord
depending on the context. YHWH is actually commonly connected
and related with the title “Adonai” - used with the divine name Yahweh as a
title of reverence for God serving as a substitute pronunciation of the
Tetragrammaton YHWH. When the Hebrew
reader came to these letters they always substituted in pronunciation the word
"‘ adhonay." Its vowels combined with the tetragrammaton form the
word "Yahweh (Yahweh)." Also Im not sure how your assessment
of the Septuagint title kύριος significantly differ from the Hebrew אֲדֹנִי (adoni) ? As you
yourself said kύριος refers to both God and a human lord eg. Abraham ? Have Christian translators and
apologists seized on this ambiguity in order to promote their theology? No. You
should note that for centuries Christian leaders have been trained and still
are in Hebrew and any ambiguity has always been clarified and have well
documented their rationale. |
Posted By: Placid
Date Posted: 06 June 2018 at 8:42am
|
Hi Truthnowcome. I have been reading your topic and you have covered a lot of Scripture, however, when it is put together it can sometimes be confusing. --- I see the conversation has strayed away from the Comforter, so I would like to bring it back to your subject. Quote: TWO PERSONALITY (1John.2: 1) “...we have an “advocate (comforter)” with the father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” (John14: 26) “but the comforter which is the holy ghost...” ONE IN HEAVEN (John 14:16) “…I will pray to the father, and “he” shall give you another comforter that he may abide with you for ever. (John 16:7) “Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is expedient for you that I go for if I go not away, the comforter will not come unto you, but if I depart, I will send him unto you!” In heaven: (John 3: 13 kjv) “and no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is ‘in’ heaven.” Jesus pbuh was the Son of man “ON” earth and he spoke about “another” Son of man which is “IN” heaven. --- I believe we need to start at the beginning to understand what the Scripture says. So we need to start with the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel. (Immanuel means ‘God with us’)” The fulfillment is in Matthew 1:22 This was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: 23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.” --- It says in 2 corinthians 5:19 “That is that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself.” --- So Immanuel referred to Christ, the Messiah. Then we have the child that was born, where the angel of the Lord said, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is [g]conceived (begotten) in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name [h]Jesus (Savior), for He will save His people from their sins.” --- So there are these two; Jesus the Savior and Christ the Messiah. Jesus was born on earth, and Christ descended from heaven. --- Jesus was physical and Christ is a Spiritual Being, who could indwell the physical Jesus. --- Christ was ‘the Son of Man’ that came down from heaven. To check Isaiah again we can look at 9:6 “For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder.” --- The child that was born was Jesus, son of Mary. --- The Son that was given was Christ, the Son of Man. Enough for now, we will look at the Scriptures that show this next time. |
Posted By: Placid
Date Posted: 07 June 2018 at 11:02am
|
Hi Truthnowcome, To continue: --- Where does it say in the Scripture that Christ was the Son of Man? There is this scene in the Book of Daniel 9:13 “I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him. 14 Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed.” If we look again at the first part of Isaiah 9:6 “For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder.” --- The child that was born was Jesus, son of Mary. --- The Son that was given was Christ, the Son of Man. I agree that Jesus was the Messenger of God, born on earth, He was sinless and was qualified to be the savior of sinners, --- but Jesus did not become the one described as the ‘Son of Man’ in Daniel, --- nor as many Christians teach, was Jesus the one who ‘had the government upon his shoulder,’ destined to sit on the throne of David. --- Another thing to notice in the Scriptures is that up until the crucifixion, Christ occupied the body of Jesus, so they went through the crucifixion together. --- And the name Jesus Christ was regularly used. --- However, after the crucifixion the name changed in most cases to Christ Jesus, giving Christ the preeminence. --- And it is taught this way in 1 Corinthians 15:3 "For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He was seen by [a]Cephas (Peter), then by the apostles. 6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep (died)." 20 "But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have [d]fallen asleep (died in faith). 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all (believers) shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. 24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son (of Man Christ) Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” |
Posted By: Placid
Date Posted: 07 June 2018 at 11:50am
|
A message to the Moderator, I had received this email from Islamicity on March 8 2018. Dear Placid Assalamu alaykum / Peace be upon you, It has been a while since we have communicated with you. We sincerely appreciate your participation in the IslamiCity Forum and contribution to a better dialogue. We are happy to share with you some good news about IslamiCity Forum in case you have not visited it recently. 1. We've upgraded the forum to the latest version. This will improve the loading speed, work better with the latest version of browsers like Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Safari etc. Most of all it has been optimized to work better on MOBILE DEVICES. This update also addressed issues on some browsers for adding images, YouTube videos, quotes and also hyperlink to the post. Last but not least the update fixes "the appearance of html code" during the edit mode. 2. We are excited and honored to be working with Dr. Aslam Abdullah to create special forum named "Ask Dr. Aslam", in this forum you will get scholarly answers and valuable information from Dr. Aslam. http://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=42283&title=ask-dr-aslam-introduction" rel="nofollow - http://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=42283&title=ask-dr-aslam-introduction 3. We have also added a new feature "Live Chat Room", where you can do live chats with other forum members. 4. Dr. Aslam has dedicated his time to be available for live chat with you every day with the following schedule: Morning 6AM - 8AM Evening 8Pm - 10 PM --- (And the picture of Aslam Abdullah was in this space.) Hope to see your continued participation in the IslamiCity Forum Best Regards, IslamiCity Forum Admin http://www.islamicity.org/forum" rel="nofollow - http://www.islamicity.org/forum I have read and studied the Quran and have answered questions before from the Bible and the Quran. I am not a trinitarian, nor do I believe that Jesus was God. I believe the revelations that Muhammad received, and that the Quran confirmed the former Scriptures. My deeper posts are from study of the Scriptures. --- If you say this is an 'Interfaith Forum,' then by being invited back to participate, the trust must be there that I am not a negative voice to Islam. I had started a topic before which was not allowed, which explains the path of a believer to holiness, which is the quality needed to enter heaven. It says in Hebrews 12: "Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord." --- I would like to post it again under a different heading if I may. If there is something objectionable, or that needs explanation, I would like it if you contact me by email. In good faith, thank you, Placid |
Posted By: Placid
Date Posted: 08 June 2018 at 7:00am
|
Hi Truthnowcome, This is the conclusion from the last two posts: This is the point I want to make: --- That Jesus was not preexistant in heaven, but was born on earth. --- Many Christians don’t agree with this, though there are no Scriptures to support that Jesus came down from heaven. They make the mistake of believing that Jesus Christ was one person and couldn’t be divided, --- However, Jesus said in John 3:6 “That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I say to you, ‘you must be born again.’” --- Neither the Holy Spirit (the Comforter) nor Christ could be seen, so they came from God to express themselves through the physical Jesus. --- As the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, could indwell the apostles on, and after, the Day of Pentecost, so Christ, the Son of Man, who came down from heaven, could indwell Jesus and speak through him, while they were together on earth, But after the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles and disciples in the upper room and “they were filled with the Holy Spirit,” who is the Comforter. |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 15 June 2018 at 7:00pm
|
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 19 June 2018 at 6:46am
You are not listening, so, let me put it to you in another way - only 2 reasons WHY a Muslim would quote a Biblical verse or verses – 1. because he’s having a debate with a Christian and 2. Because he wanted to show to the Christians that they have often misinterpreted (or read out of context) their own scriptures. Have you seen or heard a Muslim quoting Christians’ scriptures while debating with another Muslim ??
Cross-reference to John 10:30 is John 17:21 - “I pray that they will all be one, Just as you and I are one”. In John 17:21, Jesus was praying to God Almighty to make all his followers/disciples as one in purpose, just as he was one in purpose with God Almighty. Were you thinking Jesus was praying to God to make all his followers Gods too ?? See what I mean when I said Christians like you always misinterpret your own scriptures ?? As for John 15:5, do you always take the words of Jesus literally ?? Jesus was referring to people like you when he said “This is why I speak to them in parables: “Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:“ ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.”’ Matthew 13:13-15. But, I am sure you STILL will NOT understand what Jesus was saying here too.
You mean just like your understanding of “my Father and I are one” to mean God Almighty and Jesus is the one and same person and Jesus was praying to God to make all his followers Gods too ??? See what I mean when I said Christians like you always misinterpret your own scriptures ??
Again, this reflect your lack of understanding of your own Bible. I don’t really blame you as you have been taught to believe whatever was told to you by your church, Christian scholars, etc. In John 5:27, Jesus said that God Almighty has given him the authority to judge because he is the son of man. Where did he said (or he claimed as you had claimed) he will judge the earth as Son of God and raise the dead ?? Those are your OWN words or the words of your church, not Jesus – I am beginning to believe that Christianity was built on the words of other people, NOT God Almighty or Jesus.
Obviously, Jesus was not saying he’s God or one in substance with God. Read in context, NOT just a verse.
How many times must I tell you that in Greek and Hebrew, there’s no such thing as small or capital letters so, it really does not matter whether the English-translated Bibles you have today capitalized the ‘s’ or not. Surely, you cannot be thinking the original scriptures were in English ??!!
And what do you think is the basic message of the ‘Injeel’ IF it’s not the same as the Quran ?? That Jesus is God Almighty ?? And you want to highlight the Muslim ‘confusion’ when you can’t even sort out your own confusion ???
OK, so, let’s discuss the Christians’ view of sin. Are you saying disobeying God is not a sin to the Christians ??
Well, if Jesus is God the Son, then, there’s already 2 Gods (the Father and the Son). Yet, Jesus said God is One !! No wonder you are confused ! Not surprising tho', as you are taught to rely on other people's words rather than Jesus' own words !
Well, Ephesians 2:2 did say ‘dead in your transgressions and sins, which you used to live when you followed…..’, NOT ‘BORN WITH transgressions and sins, which you INHERITED…’, which means sin is NOT inherited as you are made to believe.
What has Luke 11:13 got to do with Ephesians 2:2 ??? Try reading Luke 11:13 in context before trying to mix-match it with Ephesians 2:2.
Evidence you have adequately provided ??! You mean to say evidence which you have adequately provided to show that you read your scriptures out of context most of the times ??
Yes, Proverbs 22:15 is clear in context, so, why can’t you still understand it ?? Your interpretation is simply rambling conjecture departing from the inherent meaning of the verse.
You mean to say,to you - all Jesus’ words should be taken literally ?? No wonder Jesus said of people like you have fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah – “In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:“ ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving…..”.
Again, your response reflects your inability to understand Jesus’ words. In John 10:34, Jesus was responding to the Jews who said that he claimed to be God the Son. In saying he’s the son of God, Jesus was actually saying he’s ‘the servant of God’ and not God the Son. So, when the Jews claimed he claimed to be God the Son, Jesus told them why are they claiming that when it’s also written that they are all gods and if calling them ‘gods’ don’t make them really a God, so, why are they claiming him referring himself as ‘son of God’ make him God the Son ? Obviously, when you are not blinded by your church’s preconceived belief, then, it should not be so difficult for people to understand the divinity of Jesus as God the Son is simply NOT true.
And you missed the whole point, the ‘us’ in Isaiah 6:8 was referring to the people/kingdom of King Uzziah, NOT to God Almighty. As I said before, in the Old Testament, God Almighty is referred to ‘L-O-R-D’ (all CAPITALS) and human-tittle ‘lords’ are referred as ‘L-o-r-d’ (only ‘L’ was capitalized).
Well, Isaiah 42:1 read “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight,..”. There’s nothing divine about ‘my servant’ and ‘My chosen one’, other than God chose whoever He wishes to be His chosen representative. So, who said ‘servant of God’ is not synonymous with ‘son of God’ ??
Well, of course, If you read Matthew 3:17 it refers to the Greek word ‘huios’ which means ‘son’, and when you read Isaiah 42:1, it refers to the Hebrew word ‘av-di’ which means “servant, slave’ - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/isaiah/42-1.htm" rel="nofollow - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/isaiah/42-1.htm So, Matthew 3:17 was actually a reference to Isaiah 42:1 and because the NT gospelists wanted to project Jesus as God the Son, they replaced the word ‘servant’ with ‘Son’ in Matthew 3:17. Unless you believe Isaiah 42:1 was NOT a reference to Jesus, then, I repeat, you are wrong and do not understand your own scripture, as always.
Well, go and read the whole of Luke 22 again. You mean to say the Chief Priests were right about Jesus that he did commit blasphemy ?? And why did Jesus need to pray to God Almighty to save him from his accusers if he’s also God ?? And why did Jesus need to pray to God Almighty to save him from his accusers if he came to die for your sins anyway ??? You are right the verses are clear but obviously you are not clear in the understanding of your own scriptures.
Suppositions and more supposition from you. Even if you cross-reference to Matthew 27:11-14, it’s obvious that Jesus was so frustrated with the Jews of not listening to him (of explaining of who he is) that he decided not to respond anymore to their questions.
Well, John is NOT Jesus. You need to stick with the literary context of what Jesus really said in John 6:38, John 8:23 and in the whole gospel and you will see that Jesus NEVER claimed to be God. But alas, you, like most Christians today, never listened to Jesus and if you did, you took Jesus’ words literally.
Not really. The Jews and the Romans wanted to kill Jesus NOT be-cause they were obeying or conforming to God’s Command (another supposition of yours ??), BUT because Jesus was preaching to them to worship ONLY to the ONE true God – God Almighty, whom he called ‘Father’. As for Pilate’s attitude, well, Pilate knew of Jesus’ innocence and he knew (or suspect) of the Jews’ plan to falsely convict Jesus of blasphemy and that’s why he came across as righteous.
Not really. Christians seemed to have this misconception that every time Jesus said he had to suffer, they understood that to mean Jesus is saying that he must suffer thru the agony of crucifixion before he ‘died’ and ‘rise again’. This is what the Christians are taught to believe but, this is far away from the truth and not what Jesus meant when he said he had to suffer. What Jesus meant by that statement was the fact that all prophets, in carrying and conveying the Message of God to the people, will endure sufferings, persecutions, abused, etc, at some point of their life and some were even killed. He there-fore, accepted this fact that he too, like all the prophets before him, will endure sufferings as he too is carrying and conveying the Mes-sage of God to the people. This is a fact which Jesus also made when he ends his final beatitude with “Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” – Matthew 5:12 NIV
I have already shown you that God Almighty Himself have revealed in the Quran that Muhammad is the Comforter as referenced by Jesus. So, why would Muhammad himself need to say he’s the Comforter when God Almighty had already confirmed that ??? We know Jesus NEVER claimed to be God and did God Almighty Himself confirm Jesus is God too ?? Ahh, I see you are still under the spells of the gospelists and your scholars into believing Jesus is God the Son by their usage of capitalized ‘S’ in ‘Son of God’ when the Greek and Hebrew have no distinctions between capital and non-capital letters. As I have said many times, ‘son/Son of God’ simply means ‘servant of God’ in the scriptures.
Hmmm, how did I contradict myself here ??? Care to explain ??
You obviously do not understand what you read (and thus, your lack of understanding of your own Bible), so, please refer back to my response in regards to the identification of ‘truth and lies’.
Is it my fault that you cannot understand what you read ??? And, yes, you STILL have NOT shown me that God Almighty said He’s a ‘3-in-1’ God.
Okay, humor me – which OT did Jesus consistently validate ???
Hey, why blame me when you have faulty logic and cannot understand what you read ??
Well, the Bible words are NOT the inspired Words of God, BUT rather, they are the words of the writers/gospelists who may or may not, have the divine inspirations to write, BUT the words used are still their own words NOT God’s inspired Words – and that’s why they can be ‘influenced’ to write something else other than what God had inspired them to write, as confirmed by Jeremiah 8:8.
Who's evading ?? As I said before, the hadiths, like the Bible, are written by men. For the hadiths to be reliable, they must be in accordance with the Quran. If the words of other people in the Bible are to be reliable, they need to be in accordance with the words of Jesus. As it turned out to be, you and most of the Christians today are taught to rely more on the words of other people than the words of Jesus.
In other words, the OT was about God Almighty and the NT (especially the gospel of John) was about Jesus and making him God too. I guess Jeremiah was right when he prophesized "'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD, "when actually the LYING PEN of the scribes has HANDLED IT FALSELY?””. You don't need to have a PhD to know what 'lying pen' and 'hamdled it falsely' means, do you ??
From a holy scripture (Muslim’s or Christian’s) standpoint, ‘violence’ is associated to unnecessarily and unprovoked physical confrontation, transgressions, and ‘fighting’ is associated to in defense of God’s Honor and Name. ‘Fighting’ does always mean physical confrontation or physical fighting, BUT, it can also refer to verbal confrontation (just as we are engaged in now), non-violence protests or just in thoughts when one is incapable to physically protest or engaged in verbal confrontation. Physical confrontation/physical fighting can be the only option when one is physically attacked and all non-physical options have been exhausted. So, in the case of Jesus, when only one of his disciples drew his sword to prevent the Jews from arresting him, Jesus told that disciple to put back his sword as, being a practical man, Jesus knew it would be suicidal for only one man to fight a group of armed soldiers who came to arrest him. You need to understand how Jesus think - he did expect his followers to fight for him but he did expect them to fight as a united group of believers, NOT just one man to fight for him. Christians seems to have this false perception that no matter what your enemies do to you or your loved ones, you should just smile and pat your enemies’ backs. So, if someone came into their house and rape their wives and daughters, they should just sit back and watch and do nothing. Fact is God Almighty is most loving and forgiving but He did create hell to put those who sin and transgress in, or in the other words, sinners and transgressors will be punished if they did not seek repentance over their sins. What does that tell you ??
What ??!! Are you saying Isaiah 53:12 was prophesizing Jesus as a transgressor and therefore to fulfill this prophesy, Jesus instructed his disciples to get swords ???!! So much for your ‘understanding’ of your own scriptures !!
Even your satire ‘about UFOs and flying pigs’ are irrelevant unless you expect Jesus or the people of his times to have heard of such satires, let alone believe in one. So, you need to take responsibility for your faulty logic or keep a better track of your posts.
Then, you REALLY cannot understand what you read. If Jesus never expect his followers not fight the Jews/Romans to stop them from arresting him, then, Jesus WOULD NOT have said “If it were, my servants WOULD FIGHT to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders,”. He did NOT say “My servants would not fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders as I never set an example of fighting to them” - he NEVER said that or anything to that effect, did he ?? So, it turned out to be your so-called ‘healthy’ logic was NOT THAT healthy after all !!
Wow, why such language when you have shown, again and again, you just cannot understand your own scriptures ??? Everything you have explained only confirmed your lack of understanding. Fact is, even if I put the word ‘BUT’ to Jesus’ words, it would NOT change the fact that Jesus did expect his followers to fight to stop the Jews/Romans from arresting him - “(BUT) If it were, my servants WOULD FIGHT to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders,”. So, I guess, to borrow your own term, the ‘BS’ is really after everything you said !!
Congrats !! Again you proved that you just cannot understand what you read !! Well done !!
Yes, its really quite simple. As I said earlier, if Jesus never expected his followers to fight the Jews/Romans to stop them from arresting him, then, Jesus WOULD NOT have said “If it were, my servants WOULD FIGHT to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders,”. The phrase ‘would fight’ tells us Jesus expect his disciples to fight. But then again, you have proven time and time again, you just cannot understand what you read. Sad. Really, if you are to be taken seriously in the area of apologetics you need to be doing a lot better than this and stop trying to prove to me time and time again, that you cannot understand what you read - I am fully aware of that !! |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 01 July 2018 at 3:37pm
Oh really, two reasons now for Muslims using the Bible !
First it was one, now its two. You like to move the goal posts don’t you ! My
point stands ”. You using Christian scripture Is not valid due you not adequately determining criteria for
“truth and lies.” And until Muslims or you, do so you have no authority to
quote from the Bible by simply picking and choosing what suits. And no the
circular argument logical fallacy of “truth being what lines up with the Quran
is not good enough. You have not been able to prove differently. You are wrong about John 10.30, 15.5 and 17.21. have a good
read. Jesus says in 15.5 I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in
me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.
Look at the imagery of the parable. A vine is a living substance or organism. A
branch is a living extension of the same substance. Fruit is a further living
extension of the same substance. Jesus tells his followers to “remain in me .
To “remain in me”, means … to remain in
ME. Not just simply remain in his purpose. And yes in a way as his followers become one with the branch
and the vine they also become one with God. In a way they will be come as like
“Gods” too. That’s what the term “Born
again “ means. You have not even been able to refute or explain any of the
verses I have quoted and please tell me exactly how could I take John 15.5
literally? It is obviously figurative. But the meaning is obvious – God The
Father, Jesus Christ God The Son and his followers all become one in substance. Matthew 13:13-15 “Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand” applies to you. I will be interested to see how you try to weedle and riddle your way out of this. You claim it is my words in my mention of John 5.27. You are
wrong again. Lets read from John 5.24 to John 5.30 - “Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come
when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will
live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the
Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to judge because he is the
Son of Man. “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned. So as you can see these are the words of Jesus as detailed
in the Injeel. Not my words or the words of the church as you claim. So you
tell me, which human “prophet” has the power to call the dead from their graves
and to judge? There have and are no human beings with that ability.” So continuing onto to John 11.25 obviously John 11.25 is
also about this. And I must add you haven’t even been able to refute John
11.25. You need to just stop blindly accepting what your Imams and
Mullahs tell you and read the whole Bible with an open mind. In my mentioning of John 17.21, Psalm 82.6 and John 10.34
there is no need to get upset over the use of a small ‘s’ or a capital ‘S’ as I
simply made that distinction for your understanding. The actual scriptures I
quoted are not effected by a small or capital ‘s’. So it’s a non issue. However
when it comes to understanding the distinction between a small ‘s’ or capital
‘S’ and any distinction made in either the Greek or Hebrew I understand it
better than you. Regarding the Injeel and Suras 5:46. S. 57:27, 10. 94, 5:48,
3:3 any contradiction between what the Injeel says and Muslim doctrine is your
problem not mine. I have provided may verses that you have been unable to
refute. The best you can do is resort to riddles. You ask if I am saying disobeying God is not a sin to the
Christians ? of course disobeying God is a sin. However sin goes much deeper
than mere disobedience. And in terms of your point that “if Jesus is God the Son, so
there must be 2 Gods, but Jesus saying God is one”… my advice to you is don’t make life
difficulty for yourself. It is not hard to conceptualise One God with more than
one aspect. I think you purposely make it hard for yourself as that’s what your
Imams and Mullahs do. Regarding Ephesians 2:2 once again you miss (or evade) the
point. The point being the ruler of the kingdom of the air (Satan) is at work.
It is not a 50 /50 playing field where simple choices determine righteousness. And in terms of Luke 11.13 I never made a direct comparison with Ephesians 2.2. and what verses exactly do you recommend I read Luke 11.13 in context with? You are not clear. You need to stop being evasive and refute Luke 11.13 which you have not been able to do. I have broken down the Hebrew in Proverbs 22.15 and your
only response is “rambling conjecture”. As well as provide you with relevant
verses around the doctrine of original sin I have provided a detailed
explanation in the Greek terms of poneroi hyparchontes. You have not been able
to refute what I have provided and simply make a pathetic response of “reading
scriptures out of context”. You need to refute the verses and / or linguistic
meaning I provide rather than make baseless claims. You need to do better than
this. And do I say to take all of Jesus words literally? Yes and no. It depends on the literary context. Let me define literary context for you. It consists of understanding the literary genre that the book of the Bible exists in. Why is Genre Important? Genre is the covenant between the author and the recipient. Surrounding Text. Surrounding text starts with the passage itself and slowly works outwards. Have you even read the Bible ? Or do you just regurgitate what your leaders tell you. Try actually reading the Injeel for yourself and you may begin to understand it. You are wrong about John 10:34. Read back a verse to John
10:33. The Jewish leaders accuse him of claiming to be God where they say - “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied,
“but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” John 10.33. And then read on into John 10.36 where Jesus says - “ what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very
own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I
said, ‘I am God’s SON?” In the Greek the word is “huios” meaning … Son … not
servant ! So because you have your initial premise wrong the rest of your
argument falls apart into riddles. Regarding the plurality of God in Isaiah 6.8 your
explanation of it referring to the people of King Uzziah and not God does not
make sense. The reason for this is that if you read on to Isaiah 6.9 you will
see God is wanting Isaiah to go and
preach to the people of King Uzziah. So why would the “us” be the people of
King Uzziah when He is asking Isaiah to go and preach to people of King Uzziah
? And its interesting that you are using capitals and lower
case now! I have only ever used them to
make a distinction to clarify understanding while you have contradicted
yourself in using them to reference scripture. You are the one that says in Greek and Hebrew, there’s no such thing as
small or capital letters. Like I say you have contradicted yourself and you need
to keep better track on your previous posts. I agree Isaiah 41 does not clearly define divine qualities.
But it does fit with the life of Jesus. In terms of a ruler with divine eternal
qualities you are better referring to Isaiah 53- “Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.5 But he was
pierced for our transgressions, he was
crushed for our iniquities;the punishment that brought us peace was on
him, and by his wounds we are healed.6
We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to our own way;and the Lord has laid on him the
iniquity of us all.7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his
mouth;he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its
shearers is silent,so he did not open his mouth.8 By oppression[a] and judgment
he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested?For he was cut off from
the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished. 9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,and with the rich
in his death,though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.10
Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the
Lord makes[c] his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will
of the Lord will prosper in his hand.11 After he has suffered,he will see the
light of life[d] and be satisfied[e];by his knowledge[f] my righteous servant
will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,[g] and he will divide the spoils with the strong,[h]because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors.For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.” Isaiah 53. As you can see we have an earthly ruler with divine
qualities that took up our pain and bore
our sufferings was pierced for our transgressions, was crushed for our
iniquities with the punishment that brought us peace, by his wounds we are
healed. He had laid on him the iniquity of us all.He was cut off from the land
of the living; for the transgression of the people he was punished. He was an
offering for sin, justified many, and he bore their iniquities ,bore the sin of
many, and made intercession for the
transgressors ! So we finally agree in Mathew 3.17 it is not refer-ring to a
servant but so (Huios) and Im not disputing Isaiah 42:1 in that it refers to
the Hebrew word ‘av-di’ which means “servant, slave’ . But your connecting
Isaiah 42.1 with Mathew 3.27 is only indirect and tentative. What is your basis
in stating Matthew 3:17 was a direct reference to Isaiah 42:1? You need to
prove it. There is a closer connection between Isaiah 40.3 and Psalm 2.7 with
Mathew 3.17 than Isaiah 42.1. You have no proof the NT gospelists wanted to project Jesus as God the Son so they replaced the word ‘servant’ with ‘Son’ in Matthew 3:17. Without proof all you have is a conspiracy theory. The other thing you need to know is that Christians have always referred to Jesus as The Messiah as both “Son” and “servant”. Regarding your question on Luke 22.66, yes in the opinion of
the Chief Priests Jesus was committing blasphemy. Have a good read and you will
see. And you ask why Jesus needed to pray to God to save him from
his accusers if he’s also God. You need to quote the verse and as I have told
you a few times now Jesus was God the Son, not God the Father. However I
presume you are referring to Luke 22.42. if you have a good read he was not
asking to be saved from his accusers but rather he was asking to be removed
from being the the suffering generally. However you will also note he said
“your will be done”. You like most Muslims don’t understand the idea of the
hypostatic union which is the dynamic between the human and divine elements of
Jesus. There were times when the human aspect of his nature were at the fore
and other times when his divine nature were more evident. Yes Luke 22.66 is clear however you have not been able to refute what I have presented. The understanding of Jesus being accused of blasphemy is clear, but you simply choose to cloud your own understanding. This is denial on your behalf. The suppositions are all yours. You have not been able to
refute Luke 22.66 and in relation to Matthew 27:11-14 you are wrong in that
Jesus had been attempting to explain to them who he was. If you knew the Gospels you would know Jesus never explained things clearly to the Jews (religious elders). You need to prove your claim that he did. The verses are clear, the Chief Priests genuinely believed what they were doing was convicting a blasphemer. You need to prove differently from the scriptures as opposed to vague conjecture on your part. Your attempt to refute my quote of John 6.38 and 8.23 by
saying John is not Jesus is weak. John was a best friend of Jesus and an eye
witness to the events. He was far more knowledgeable of what Jesus said and did
than you. And yes, yes, as established and well known by Christians
before Islam ever came on the scene was that Jesus never directly said “I am
God”. However as stated he always talked indirectly often through parables as a
means of sifting out people who had the discernment of God. Obviously you are not one of those. You are of the same mind and spirit of the
Jewish elders at the time. As I have said and proven Jesus never directly said “I am God” but he implied it in his talking in parables, and he said enough to have himself killed for blasphemy and as I have also displayed he often referred to himself with divine and eternal qualities. You need to accept the Bible as it reads not try to weedle and riddle your way out of it. In terms of your claim the Jews and Romans wanted to kill
Jesus for preaching to them to worship only the One true God whom he called
‘Father’ you have provided no proof and you have been unable to refute my
evidence that it was because of blasphemy. Your position is Muslim wishful
thinking and one that you parrot after listening to your Mullahs. Don’t make
claims unless you provide proof. If you want more proof he was accused of blasphemy then read
the following where it is clear the Jewish leaders were accusing him of
blasphemy – (John 10:33) “We are
not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy,
because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” (Luke 5:21) The
Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, “Who is
this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Mat 26:65) Then the
high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need
any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy. And you haven’t even addressed the point I made about Jesus
referring to himself as the figure of God who will return to judge the world in
Daniel 7.13 -15. And your statement regarding Pilate falls apart because you have not proven the above. You are wrong where you say Jesus meant he had to suffer,
not about the crucifixion, but as all prophets endured sufferings, persecutions
or were killed. You should know that Jesus said the sign of Jonah would be
given and that the temple will be destroyed and restored in three days (meaning
himself). But if you want something less abstract read Mathew 20.19 – As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, He took the twelve
disciples aside and said, “Look, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of
Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and scribes. They will condemn Him to
death and will deliver Him to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and
crucified. And on the third day He will be raised to life.”… Matthew 20:19 For someone who claims to know the Bible so well I thought
you would know that. So your conclusion in Matthew 5:12 where Jesus said “Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you” is obviously out of context. One again you pick and choose what you want without attending to the wider context of Mathew. You say you have shown me that God has revealed in the Quran
that Mohamad is the Comforter as referenced by Jesus. Firstly I don’t believe
in the Quran, so there is no point in referencing it to me. And where ever you
have referenced Jesus I have refuted your points and all you have dome is reply
with riddles or baseless accusations. As you have not shown me where Mohmad directly said “I am
the comforter” your position is hypocritical. Ive already stated to you Jesus did not directly say “I am God” but I have provided ample evidence that he was crucified for blasphemy and that he made claims about himself that inferred divine and eternal qualities. You have not been able to provide any such evidence for Mohmad saying “ I am the comforter”. You ask how did you contradicted yourself in your quoting of Christian scripture. As I said you have contradicted yourself in that initially you said “ – Muslims only quote the Bible when we want to correct your lack of understanding to your own scripture.” However just like Truthnowcome you have used John 14:16 and John 16:13 to support an Islamic proposition. The explanation is clear. You are just being evasive. In regards to your identification of truth and lies when it
comes to your use of the Bible, as you seem to lose track, or are being evasive
of what you say let me remind you. Your rationale for truth and lies was the
logical fallacy of circular reasoning, that if the Bible does not line up with
the Quran then it is a lie. As already proven to you this in not a valid
argument due its circular reasoning. You claim I have not shown you the words of God saying He is a ‘3-in-1’ God, or the words of Jesus saying that. As I have just said in the light you have not done so with Mohamad saying he was the comforter, this is special pleading on your behalf. You ask which Old testament did Jesus refer to? THE Old Testament. The torah and tanakh. How can you say the Bibles words are not the inspired Word
of God when your Quran validates the truth of the Bible in Suras 5:46. S.
57:27, 10. 94, 5:48, 3:3. And in regards to the Bible being “influenced” the Bible is the most reliable of all ancient manuscripts which I am happy to demonstrate if you require. Regarding Mohamad torturing his enemies like I said the
Hadith and Sahih hadith in particular have been a primary source of Islamic
jurisprudence for centuries. So don’t try to evade the point by saying hadith
is not reliable. But if as you say hadith must be in accordance with the Quran, im sure you are well aware of the dozens of violent verses in the Quran. For example -S 2:190,S2:191, 2:193, S2:216, S4:74, S4:89, S4:95, S 8:60,S 8:65,S 9:14.And don’t give me a defence that these should be viewed in the historical context of the day. Because if you do you that would be saying the Quran is not the absolute Word of God for all times to all people. Regarding the difference between the Old Testament and the
New Testament you are partly correct in saying the Old Testament was about God
and the New Testament was about Jesus. However what you should know is the link
between them in that the Old Testament carried many prophetic verses about the
coming Messiah which Jesus fulfilled. In regards to your quoting of Jeremiah your are actually
referring to Jeremiah 8.8 which is a common and tired old Muslim argument. Let
me explain it to you. It is clear Jeremiah was simply rebuking the scribes for
their traditions that led people astray from the word of God. The preservation of the Word was never at risk Consider
these points - 1. Other godly men also had copies of the Torah in their
possession. Eg. the prophet Daniel. Plus other prophets affirm that the book of
Moses was still available during their day.eg. Nehemiah 8:13-14,18. This
occurred approximately 430 B.C., nearly 180 years after Jeremiah. 2. The Lord Jesus and his followers quoted from the Torah as
we know it today and never thought that it was corrupt (cf. Matthew 4:4,7,10;
22:31-32d. 3. Even Jeremiahs enemies knew that the Law could never
disappear. Jeremiah 18:18. 4. If you read Jeremiah 36: 1-7, 20-32, 27-32.You will see
that If God was capable of restoring the revelation given to Jeremiah after it had been
destroyed, then God would also have been capable of restoring the original
Torah. 5. Jeremiah said …“ If you do not listen to me and follow MY LAW …. So how could Israel follow the Law, i.e. the Torah, if it had been corrupted? Jeremiah 26:4-6 In regards to violence and the ethics of self defence your
definition of violence is rambling and convoluted. As a result it lacks
validity. And in your claim that Jesus knew it would be suicidal for
only one man to fight a group of armed soldiers and that he expected is nothing
but pure conjecture. I have already proven to you Jesus said to love ones
enemies and “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword”. My argument is
supported by the words of Jesus. Your argument is nothing but hypothetical
conjecture. If you want conjecture maybe Jesus didn’t want them to pull a sword
because he might have dropped it on his foot and they would have to go to
hospital but they didn’t have ambulances back then … ! Regarding Christian pacifism and the ethics of self defence
what you need to realise is “loving ones neighbour” is an ideal to strive for.
Reality will always dictate a practical and reasonable response to aggression.
But to have such a high ideal to strive for is honourable and has a moderating
influence on society. That is something Muslim society would benefit from
considering the Muslim world is in such a mess today. You ask what does it tell me when God created hell to put those who sin and transgress in, if they did not seek repentance over their sins ? I don’t know. What is it supposed to tell me ? You ask was Isaiah 53:12 prophesying Jesus as a
transgressor and therefore to fulfil this prophesy, Jesus instructed his
disciples to get swords. Yes that’s it exactly. What’s your problem here ? You state Jesus did not say “My servants would not fight to
prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders as he never set an example of fighting
to them”. Your use of double negatives and hypothetical conjecture doe nothing
to mask your logical fallacy of a non Sequitur –(meaning literally, "It
does not fol-low”). Your argument is
clumsy and deviates from healthy logic and scripture. I have already proven to
you through scripture Jesus said to love ones enemies and “he who lives by the
sword dies by the sword”. My argument is supported by scripture while your
argument is nothing but hypothetical conjecture and logical fallacies. In conclusion you have improved somewhat in not falling into the trap of logical fallacies but you still do however resort to convoluted riddles as a means of evasion. There is nothing new in what you have to say and my advice to you is don’t just rely on the interpretation of your Mullahs and Imams but approach the Bible with an open mind. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 08 July 2018 at 9:25am
Well, the number of reasons is not the objective here, BUT, its WHY a Muslim would quote a Biblical verse. Why do you think a Muslim would quote a Biblical verse ?? And what’s your criteria to determine “truth and lies” ?
You would have taken John 15:5 literally IF you believe God Almighty and Jesus are one and same entity or they are equal. “To remain in me” simply means to remain in the guidance circle of Jesus or in other words, to continue to be attached to the preaching of Jesus, or figuratively speaking, like a branch is attached to the vine – just as the branch which is attached to the vine will bear fruits, so will the disciple who remain attached to Jesus’ preaching will reap the reward in the afterlife.
A good example of “Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand” will be when one read, say, John 10:30 or John 15:5, they understand those verses to mean that God Almighty and Jesus Christ are one and same person. If your understanding of those verses is such, then, you are said to be one of those who “Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand” – are you one of those people ??
Well, you left out John 5:24 in your quote, despite writing “Lets read from John 5.24 to John 5.30”. I assume that’s unintentional, BUT, John 5:24 is key in understanding the following verses (John 5:25-30) which you quoted. In John 5:24, Jesus said “Very truly I tell you, who-ever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life”. In other words, Jesus was saying that whoever listen to him and believe in God Almighty who sent him will have eternal life. The phrase ‘believe in him who sent me’ can only be a reference to God Almighty as Jesus could not be saying he sent himself! So, when your understanding is based on what Jesus said (NOT on what other people said), then you should also understand that Jesus was also referring to the voice of God Almighty when he said “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out” – John 5:28-29, as Jesus clearly did not say “… when all who are in their graves will hear my voice and come out”. So, to your question, ‘which human “prophet” has the power to call the dead from their graves and to judge?’, the answer is, no one, as only God Almighty has the power to do that.
John 11:25 reads ‘Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die”’. Yes, it did imply a resurrection, but, the question is - what was Jesus’ understanding when he said “I am the resurrection and the life”?? First of all, you should know that every Muslim and Christian believe in the Day of Judgment and anyone who believe in the Day of Judgment, will believe in the Day of the Resurrection, that is, the day when all the dead will be resurrected to be judged by God. So, every time Jesus spoke or implied a resurrection, it’s crucial that we know which resurrection was he referring to – was it a reference to his own ‘resurrection’ on earth as all Christians believed, or a reference to the resurrection at the Last Day before the Judgment ?? To know this, we need to go back to John 11 and understand WHY Jesus said “I am the resurrection” - ‘“Lord,” Martha said to Jesus, “if you had been here, my brother would not have died. But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask.” Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” Martha answered, “I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?”’ – John 11:21-26 We can clearly see when Jesus said “I am the resurrection and the life”, he was responding to Martha who had said earlier she knew her brother will rise again at the last day, that is, the day of the Resurrection. This tell us that Jesus, in saying “I am the resurrection and the life” was also referring to the Day of the Resurrection of the last day as he was responding to Martha’s statement and NOT about himself rising from the dead on this earth. Now, you may say “Still that did not explain WHY Jesus said ‘I am the resurrection and the life”. The explanation is simple – the Day of the Resurrection also marks the coming of the Judgment Day - so, when Jesus said ‘I am the resurrection”, he’s saying he’s the Sign for the Day of Resurrection. In other words, when Martha said she knew her brother will rise again in the last day ie. in the Day of the Resurrection, Jesus informed her that he’s the Sign of the Resurrection that is, his second coming will mark the coming of the last day when the dead will be resurrected. Its like the Angel of Death saying “I am death” which would mean he’s the sign of death and if he comes calling on you, then, you knew death is not far away from you. This also explain why Jesus said “The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die” in the same breath as “I am the resurrection and life”. In other words, Jesus was telling Martha and those present not to fear for those who had died earlier for if they had died believing in him as the messiah and prophet of God, they will continue to live on in the kingdom of heaven, and those who are still living (a reference to Martha and those still living at that time) and these people believe in him as the messiah and prophet of God, will not die – which, of course, does not mean they will live forever in their earth life, but it means after their earthly death, they too will continue to live on in the kingdom of heaven, which Jesus often refers to as the ‘everlasting life’. So really, you need to just stop blindly accepting what your church and your preachers tell you and read the whole Bible with an open mind to understand what Jesus really said and NOT what other people claimed what Jesus said.
I am not upset as whether you capitalized the ‘S’ in the phrase ‘S/son of God’ or not, it means the same, that is, it means ‘servant of God’, BUT, to you and the Christians, a capitalized ‘Son of God’ means God the Son, so, it’s an issue to you and the Christians if the translators of the English-translated Bibles did not capitalized the letter ‘s’ when referring to Jesus as the ‘son of God’.
For you to say “…. any distinction made in either the Greek or Hebrew I understand it better than you” only show that you knew nothing about Greek or Hebrew alphabets as, (again) there’s NO DISTINCTION of small and capital letters in Greek and Hebrew alphabets.
What verses have you provided that I cannot refute ?? And what contradiction are there between what Jesus truly said and the Muslim doctrine ?? Fact is, any contradiction found between what the Bible said and the Muslim doctrine are NOT what of Jesus had said, but rather, those of what other people claimed of what Jesus said in the Bible, especially when Jesus himself NEVER made those claims himself and neither did God Almighty made those claims on Jesus' behalf.
Care to elaborate further, that is, if you can ??
Well, instead of just being good at giving ‘advice’, why don’t you, for once, address or try to refute – “if Jesus is God the Son, so there must be 2 Gods, but Jesus said God is one”, can you ??
Who’s talking about a 50/50 playing field ?? And once again you miss (or evade) the point. The point is NOT about “being the ruler of the kingdom of the air (Satan) is at work”, but the point is, original sin is NOT a divine teaching as no one is born with sin and that’s why Jesus, or any prophets of God, has ever preached original sin.
Try reading Luke 11 in total to understand Luke 11:13 in context and not just Luke 11:13 – that’s what I mean.
Actually, your “explanation” of original sin IS rambling conjecture – heck, you cannot even prove Jesus, or any other prophets of God before him, ever preached original sin !! So, your so-called ‘detailed explanation’ is actually repetition of what other people preach to you and NOT what Jesus preach to you - you need to do better than this.
“Yes and no” ?? Exactly what I mean when I said the Bible is a Book of truth and lies !! If you can understand why Jesus’ words can be taken figuratively and some, literally, depending on the literary context, then why can’t you understand that the Bible can also be a book of truth and lies, depending on the context and whose sayings are being narrated ??
Well, in the above verses you quoted, WHO exactly was making those claims (of Jesus claiming to be God) ?? Jesus himself ?? No, it was the people – the Jews, the chief priests, etc, NOT Jesus. Are you saying just because the Jews, who wanted to get rid of him, claimed that Jesus, a mere man, claimed to be God, therefore, it must be true ?? In other words, if people claim that you, a mere man, claimed to be Satan, therefore, it must be true that you are Satan ?? As I have said many times, listen to what Jesus claimed of himself and NOT of what other people claimed of him on his behalf.
Well, capitalizing all the letters as ‘S-O-N’ don’t make Jesus God the Son – never did and never will. Again, if you read John 10:36 in context, Jesus was asking the Jews why do they accuse him of blasphemy (claiming to be God the Son) when he said he’s God’s son when it’s was also written in their law that they are all ‘gods’ and yet none of them claimed to be God. So, if it was written in their law that they were all gods and none of them considered that as blasphemy, then, Jesus saying he’s ‘the son of God’ cannot be blasphemy too, but, yet, the Jews are accusing him of blasphemy ! That’s what John 10:36 in context was, but because you have your initial premise wrong (that Jesus is God the Son) the rest of your argument just falls apart, as always.
Well, ask yourself this - in Isaiah 6:8, who was ‘I’ and who was ‘the Lord’ ? In Isaiah 6:9, ‘the Lord’ was not a reference to God Almighty because, as I have told you before, in the OT, God Almighty is always referred to ‘L-O-R-D’ – all letters are capitalized (for example see Isaiah 6:3).
Not really. I only use capital or upper and lower case to reflect your understanding in accordance to what the gospelists want you, as a Christian, to understand, that is, when they translate the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts to English. Else how can I refute you or have a discussion with you if I do not know your ‘understanding’ of your Bible in the first place ??
Well, Isaiah 53 is not a conclusive reference that it’s about Jesus, as even among the Christians, they seemed divided as who the ‘Suffering Servant’ was. One group said Isaiah 53 was about Jesus while the other group said its about the sufferings of the Jews seen collectively as one person or one nation, which is not uncommon in the Scripture - http://www.aish.com/sp/ph/Isaiah_53_The_Suffering_Servant.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.aish.com/sp/ph/Isaiah_53_The_Suffering_Servant.html
Finally agree ?? Not really. I said Matthew 3:17 uses the word ‘son’ BUT it’s a reference to a servant (of God). It's like if I tell you to fly a kite, it's clear that I don't mean for you to really get a kite and fly it, but, I was asking you to go away. So, you can say 'go fly a kite' is synonymous with 'go away'. Likewise, 'son' in Matthew 3:17 is synonymous with 'servant' in Isaiah 42:1. You can prove this by reading Isaiah 42:1 and Matthew 3:17 side by side : “Hre is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight” - (Isaiah 42:1) and “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:17) Swapping Isaiah 42:1 with Matthew 3:17 will not alter the meaning or the intention of the passages of Isaiah 42 and Matthew 3 respectively. For example, Isaiah 42:1 can be read as “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased” and Matthew 3:17 can be “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight”. Did you see any difference in the meaning of those verses in their respective passages even when the verses are swapped ??
Isaiah 40:3 does not even come close to Matthew 3:17 and as for Psalm 2:7, what makes you think it was about Jesus and not David ?? Let’s see whether you understand your own Bible or you just rely on whatever your church and your preachers told you to believe. Heed Jesus’ advice – ‘test all spirits’, or in other words, do not simply believe everything your so-called preachers and scholars tell you to believe.
Well, as they say – ‘the proof is in the pudding’, so, go and read TO UNDERSTAND what Jesus really said (and NOT what other people said) in your own scripture.
Again, your response only reflected your level of ‘understanding’ of your own Bible. Asking to be removed from the suffering IS asking to be saved. You must understand Jesus expected, as his enemies close in on him, that he will be captured and will be put on a false trial and put to death by crucifixion, which is, the capital punishment of the day. Thus, in this context, suffering is the ordeal of being persecuted, captured, being put to trial, abused and eventually, the crucifixion, which will lead to a very painful and slow death. So when Jesus prayed to God to remove the sufferings, he’s talking about the whole ordeal process of the predicament he’s in. Camprante ?
Before you make any accusation on Muslims, perhaps, you should first explain your understanding of the phrase “yet not my will, but yours be done” as you quoted above, can you ??
Are you telling me Jesus was accused of blasphemy because he’s God the Son ?? That’s your ‘clear understanding’ of Luke 22:66 ?? See what I mean when I said you cannot understand what you read in your own Bible. However, to be fair to you, why don’t you tell me what’s your understanding of Luke 22:66 and see whether I can refute your ‘explanation’ or not.
You should learn how to understand what you read as I never said, in Matthew 27:11-14, Jesus was attempting to explain to them who he was, BUT, I said “it’s obvious that Jesus was so frustrated with the Jews of not listening to him (of explaining of who he is) that he decided not to respond anymore to their questions”. How do I know this ? Simple – the fact that Jesus told the chief priests and the teachers of the law that they would not believe him if he said he is the Messiah (Luke 22:67), tells us Jesus was already frustrated of telling them that he’s the Messiah and NOT God the Son - a fact which they would not believe (“if I tell you, you will not believe me”). And how do I know Jesus said he’s NOT God the Son ?? Because when he was asked whether he’s the Son of God, Jesus told them, “You said that I am” (Luke 22:70). In other words, Jesus responded that it was them, not him, who said he’s the Son of God.
When did I claim Jesus’ explanations to the Jews are always clear to the Jews ?? I said (or to that effect) Jesus always, or at most of the times, spoke in parables and that’s why most of his words should not be taken literally, BUT, most Christians (like yourself)took his words literally and that’s why they think Jesus is literally the Son of God when he said 'the Father and I are one'.
Yes, the verses are clear (but obviously not to you) – the chief priests were trying to get rid of Jesus by falsely accusing him of blasphemy, that is, they persisted that Jesus had claimed to be God the Son, which Jesus never did and he denied that claim by saying it was only them who had said so (Luke 22:70).
When I said “John is not Jesus”, I was referring to the writer of gospel of John (that is, John ‘whoever’, as no one can be certain who really wrote the gospel of John), and not John the Baptist. Then again, even if John the Baptist or St. John, was the author of the gospel of John, they are still not Jesus, so, how can saying ‘John is not Jesus’ is weak ?? It's more likely it’s your logic that’s weak.
Which sayings of Jesus, directly or indirectly, that you think implied he was claiming to be God ?? On the other hand, how can Jesus be killed for blasphemy if he’s God ?? Blasphemy simply means the act of someone claiming to be God or equal to God. So, if he’s killed for blasphemy then, he’s not God, but only someone who claimed to be God, which was what the Jews accused him of. Moreover, can you kill God ?? Let see how you try, to borrow your phrase - ‘to weedle and riddle your way out of this’.
Well, the proofs are in your own Bible, BUT, you cannot understand them as your mind have been ‘preconceived’ to believe Jesus is God. If you think Jesus was NOT preaching to them about God and to worship only the One true God, then, what was Jesus preaching to them ?? That he’s God and he came to die for your sins ?? Prove that’s what Jesus was preaching to them - I doubt it, but, you can try.
If you want me, or anyone, to address a point you made, first, make sure your point is correct in connection with the Biblical verse you quoted in making your point. Daniel 7:13-15 reads, “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of point sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. “I, Daniel, was troubled in spirit, and the visions that passed through my mind disturbed me.”” NIV. It should be obvious to anyone (maybe other than you) reading Daniel 7 that it was about Daniel’s dreams and thus, it was Daniel’s words and NOT Jesus’ words that you're reading in Daniel 7. If it’s NOT Jesus’ words, then, it’s not Jesus who was “referring to himself as the figure of God who will return to judge the world” as you ignorantly claimed above. So, get your facts right first before asking anyone to comment on your ‘points’.
Again you made comments without elaborating further. So, what’s your understanding of ‘the sign of Jonah’ and the ‘the temple will be destroyed and restored in three days’ and who said Jesus was talking about himself when he said that ?? Did Jesus himself said that or was it the gospelists who planted that thought in your head ??
If you are suggesting that Jesus here predicted his death, I will tell you that he did not predict his death BUT, under the circumstances he was in, he expected to be arrested and condemned to death. Matthew 20:19 you quoted tells us Jesus was fully aware of what his enemies had in store for him. If you want to refute that, you need to show that when Jesus said he will be betrayed and killed, he was totally unaware that the Jews hated him and wanted to capture and kill him.
Not really. The fact that Jesus said “for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you” clearly showed that Jesus understood that carrying the message of God to the people will be burdened with hardship and to some, will cost their lives and thus, his disciples can expect him, as their prophet, to go thru the same hard-ships and sufferings, just as all the prophets before them. If you disagree, then perhaps you can explain why Jesus said “for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you”.
Well, because you don’t believe in the Quran, that’s why we Muslims quote the Bible when debating with Christians like you, unless they asked for proofs from the Quran. If you can recall, it was you who asked me for proofs in the Muslim Scripture that Muhammad said he is the Comforter as mentioned by Jesus. I said Muhammad need not said he was the Comforter as God Almighty Himself had said so in the Quran and I have provided the Quranic verses. Now, you said there is no point in referencing it to you because you don’t believe in the Quran ?? Then, why ask for proofs in the Quran ??
That’s really quite comical, especially coming from someone who hardly can understand what he read in his own scriptures !!
As I said, Muhammad need not said he was the Comforter as God Almighty Himself had said so in the Quran. You can say you don’t believe the Quran, which is fine, but, the point is, despite conceding Jesus himself NEVER said he’s God, you cannot even show from the Bible, God Almighty saying Jesus is God or part of a triune God. So, your position on this is hypocritical as you are not able to show neither Jesus nor God have ever claimed Jesus is God. BTW, Jesus being accused of blasphemy is not proof that he is God and when did Jesus “make claims about himself that inferred divine and eternal qualities” ?? I think you missed (or most likely, ignored) the fact that Jesus said, “By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but Him who sent me”.
You need to brush up on your logic and rationale when presenting your arguments. In correcting your lack of understanding to your own scripture like John 14:16, John 16:13, etc, it, obviously, will also support the Islamic proposition too, as we are Muslims. Likewise, for example, if someone come to you and said the 10 Commandment was given to Jesus Christ, not to Moses, you, of course, will correct his lack of understanding of the Torah and in doing so, you are also supporting your Christian’s proposition too. So, how can you say that’s contradicting and being evasive ??
What ‘circular reasoning’ are you rambling about ?? I said, for the Muslims, the truths, irrespective from which source, must be in accordance with the Quran (which all Muslims took as the literal Words of God) and for the Christians, the truths must be in accordance with what Jesus himself said and NOT what other people said or claimed. So, which teaching of Jesus that you think are not in accordance with the Muslim doctrine ?? That Jesus is God and he died for the sins of mankind ?? Jesus NEVER preached those teachings and neither have any of the prophets before him.
It really does not matter whether you believe in the Quran or not, but the fact is, I have shown you that God Almighty, in the Quran, confirmed Muhammad is the Comforter as spoken by Jesus. Muhammad need not say that himself as God Almighty have said that. You, on the other hand, has NOT been able to show me that God is a '3-in-1' God, not only from Jesus but also not from God Himself in your own Bible ! So, what nonsense ‘special pleading on my behalf’ are you talking about ??
The Quran only confirmed that God gave the Psalms to David, the To-rah to Moses and the Injil to Jesus, it DOES NOT confirm the Bible of today. 1400+ years ago, when the Quran was revealed to Muhammad, God Almighty confirmed in the Quran that He gave the Psalms to David, the Torah to Moses and the Injil to Jesus and thus, confirming the truths of those manuscripts given at that time. Today, no one can confirm that we still have the original Psalms, Torah and Injil. Even the oldest manuscripts found are said to be copies, not the original. So, as I've always said, what you have in the Bible today is a mixture of truths and lies.
I am not saying the Bible is 100% corrupted, but, I am saying the Bible is a mixture of truths and lies, so, how can anyone say it’s reliable when one can question or dispute the credibility of some of its passages ? Take Matthew 28:19 for instance which reads, “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”. ‘Baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy spirit’ is, of course, a Trinitarian Baptismal formula. The problem here is that, this only happened in Matthew 28:19 and nowhere else. Jesus himself could not have given such instruction to his disciples after his supposedly ‘resurrection’ as the New Testament only knew one baptism which is only in the name of Jesus Christ as evidenced in the book of Acts and Paul’s epistles such as Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15. In short, many Christian scholars believe Matthew 28:19 was added at a later stage. In The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ed. James Orr)(1915) Vol. 4 at 2637, under “Baptism,” it says: “Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation,...and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus”. Even Roman Catholicism’s Jerusalem Bible (N.Y.: 1966), a scholarly Catholic work, confesses at page 64 note g: “It may be that this formula, [i.e., the Trinitarian Baptismal Formula of Matthew 28:19] so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the liturgical usage established later in the primitive community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing ‘in the name of Jesus,'”. So really, how reliable is the Bible of today when even the Christian scholars question some of what was in the Bible such as Matthew 28:19 ??
The primary source of Islamic jurisprudence is the Quran. Hadiths and other Islamic sources are secondary sources, and that too, must be in accordance with the Quran. The hadiths are documentations of the sayings and the practices of the Prophet and they are written by people said to be his close companions. You can say the hadiths are very much similar to the Bible, that is, they are written by men. There are thousands of hadiths written, some by his true close companions, some by other people who may not know the Prophet personally but heard of his stories and some by his enemies out to discredit him as a prophet of God. The moral characteristics of the Prophet is well documented in the Quran. For instance, the Prophet, among other things, is, gentle to the people (Quran 3:159), kind, merciful and concern for the people (Quran 9:128), etc. So, if I read a hadith that says the Prophet tortured his enemies, then, I will be wary of that hadith as it does not connect to the characters of the Prophet as described in the Quran. Likewise, the Christians believe the Bible portrays Jesus as a peace-loving man, so, if someone came to you and said Jesus demanded that those who opposed him as their king should be killed in front of him and he quoted Luke 19:27 to prove his point, then, you should be wary of that person’s claim as it does not connect to the characteristics of Jesus as a peace-loving man in the Bible. Can you understand what I am trying to tell you ??
Not really, stories from the Quran, the Bible or any other holy scriptures of any faith, SHOULD be viewed in the context of the time, cultures, traditions and practices of the society of that time. If you do not consider these factors, then, you will not be able to spot reality from the perception. For example, Christians believe Jesus was born on December 25 or sometimes in winter time - that’s not a fact but more of a perception as the Bible NEVER stated Jesus was born on December 25 or in winter times. The Bible, however, did give a clue that it cannot be during winter times as the shepherds were out in the fields keeping watch of their flocks at the time Jesus was born (Luke 2:8). If you have considered the weather conditions at that time of the year in Bethlehem, where Jesus was born, then, you should know shepherds never went out to the fields in winter time, which tells us Jesus cannot be born in winter times or December 25. So, the question is, why do Christians still celebrate Christmas on Dec 25 as the birth of Jesus ??
Yes, about the coming Messiah, but NOT about God becoming a man or vice-versa. So, yes, Jesus fulfilled the prophetic verses of a coming prophet/Messiah. The NT, however, used most of the OT verses which only applied to God Almighty and apply them to Jesus too and in doing so, imply that Jesus is God too, which in it's true sense, is blasphemy.
Well, you can deny but you can’t ignore the significant prophetic meaning of that verse. Jeremiah 8:8 clearly said ““‘How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,” when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?”. Likewise, the Christians today think they have the law of the LORD in the Bible, when the lying pen of the scribes (and the translators) has handled it falsely.
You seem to be confused between an original and a copy or copies of the original. There will always be one original (that is, it came direct from the divine source) which cannot be altered and there will always be copies of the original which can be altered, depending on the understanding and intention of the scribes tasked to copy the original. So, you are quite right when you said Jeremiah (in Jeremiah 8:8), rebuked, or rather God told Jeremiah, to remand the scribes of their traditions of copying the original and adding their own words to the copy, which was normally done based on their understanding of the original manuscripts or the scribes have other motives, and in doing so, they led the people astray from the true path of God. What we can learn from Jeremiah 8:8 is that, the tradition of editing the original (probably in parts and not in total) was already in practice by the scribes even in the times of Jeremiah. Although we can conclude Jeremiah did remand the scribes, the Bible made no mention that the scribes had truly abandoned their traditions of editing what they are copying from the original. If the scribes had truly abandoned their traditions of editing what they copied, then, today, there would not be questions on the integrity of some of what was in the Bible, such as Matthew 28:19 mentioned earlier.
You mean to say Jesus did not know that for one man to face a group of trained and armed soldiers would be suicidal ?? You must be thinking Jesus must be as naïve as you. Well, I don’t think Jesus was that naïve as you think he was.
Yet he asked his followers to get swords ! Your argument is pretty contradicting, isn’t it ?? And your argument get sillier when you said the reason he asked his disciples to get swords was because he wanted to fulfill a prophecy !! If that’s not hypothetical conjecture, I don’t know what is.
….AND your arguments get sillier by the minutes.
Sure. But Jesus considered ‘loving your neighbors’ only as the second important commandment. The first and most important commandment, according to Jesus is, God is One (Mark 12:28-31). If you cannot even get the first and most important commandment right, flapping your lips about ‘love thy neighbors’ really sounded hypocritical.
Well, yes, not only the Muslims, but everyone can benefit by adhering to that second most important commandment. However, I don’t think the Muslim world is really in such a mess as in the Christian world involvement in sexual abuse. Here’s some of the recent reported cases: -In May 2018, the archbishop of Adelaide, South Australia, became the most senior Catholic in the world to be convicted of concealing child sexual abuse -A man considered the Church's third-ranked official, Vatican treasurer Cardinal George Pell, is due to go on trial in Australia on charges of historical sexual offences, which he denies -Vatican police arrested a former Holy See diplomat in April 2018 for suspicion of possessing child pornography -In Chile, 34 Roman Catholic bishops offered to resign in the wake of a child sex scandal and cover-up
You don’t know ?? OK, I will tell you. It means God Almighty, although Loving and Merciful, will still punish His servants who sin and do not obey His Laws and who do not repent and seek forgiveness over their sins. It means God Almighty is very practical – He’s Loving, yet firm in His Judgment and punishment, He’s Merciful, yet strict to those who sin and break His Laws. As such, God Almighty would expect man to be practical too in their relationship with their fellow mankind. Yes, you should love and treat one another the same way you want to be loved and treated (love thy neighbors), but, that does not mean you should just smile and watch your loved ones be abused or that you should not defend yourself, even if you are capable to. Christians, in saying ‘Love thy neighbors’, in theory, seems to suggest that but, in practice, they do not practice what they preached. If they do, then, Christian nations such as the US should not have invaded Iraq or killed Ben Laden in retaliation of 9-11 attack. They should have invited Ben Laden and offered their other cheeks for Ben Laden to slapped them, which was what Jesus preached in Luke 6:29, but, that’s not what happened. So, what happen to the 'offer the other cheek' and ‘love thy neighbors’ which Christians love to brag about ??
Please, stop making yourself sillier than you already are with such comments. True prophesies are not fulfilled intentionally. What that means is that if Isaiah 53:12 was a true prophecy of Jesus Christ be-coming a transgressor, then, Jesus Christ will be a transgressor with-out him having to do anything to fulfill it, or in other words, Jesus be-came a transgressor, not because he planned or wanted to be a transgressor, but, unforseen circumstances will make him a transgressor, if that’s what Isaiah 53:12 had prophesized. If that happened, then, it’s said the prophecy (Isaiah 53:12) was a true prophecy. So, let me ask you this - did that happened ? Was Jesus Christ ever a transgressor in his lifetime on earth ?? If so, how was he a transgressor ?? Guess the problem is more of your problem rather than mine.
Well, did Jesus say “My servants would not fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders as he never set an example of fighting to them” ?? Obviously, he did not, nor did he even imply that - I know that and you know that too. So, for once, please respond with ‘logical facts’, if you do have any, instead of masking your lack of logical facts by accusing others of “logical fallacy of a non Sequitur”.
Are you implying Jesus is someone who would never ask his disciples to get swords as “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword” ?? Yet, not that long ago, you have said Jesus asked his disciples to get swords because he wanted to fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah 53:12 !! Now, that’s a good example of an argument that is clumsy and deviates from healthy logic and scripture !
You mean like when you claimed Jesus asked his disciples to get swords to fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah 53:12 ?? I will say that’s the kind of argument which is nothing but hypothetical conjecture and logical fallacies.
Since you are in the mood of giving advice, I hope, you are also in the mood of receiving advice too. So, my advice to you – approach the Bible with a clear mind and read to understand your own Bible without the preconceived mindset that Jesus is God and he came to die for your sins. If you still approach the Bible with that same mindset, then, you will NEVER be able to see that Jesus NEVER claimed nor did he ever imply he’s God or came to die for your sins and nether have God Almighty ever claimed that too on behalf of His servant, Jesus Christ, who is just a prophet – a great and unique prophet, but, nevertheless, still a prophet who only serve and worship the One and Only God Almighty. |
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 24 July 2018 at 1:52pm
|
Hi Jerrymyers first off I am not a trinitarian so we will probably understand each other, so I was reading some of going back and forth with a trinitarian, that will be endless I can tell you now because it is of Allah (Yehovah) not by man that they are this way. So as it goes I was reading your last part in which you state Yeshua did not come to die for our sins, but as you seem to know the Bible you would know that he did, while this was all said by Yeshua in parables, the explanations by the apostles are clear.
John 12:23 And יהושע answered them, saying, “The hour has come for the Son of Aḏam to be esteemed. (TS98) John 12:24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit. (TS98) John 12:25 “He who loves his life shall lose it, and he who hates his life in this world shall preserve it for everlasting life. (TS98) John 12:26 “If anyone serves Me, let him follow Me. And where I am, there My servant also shall be. If anyone serves Me, the Father shall value him. (TS98) John 12:27 “Now I Myself am troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save Me from this hour’? But for this reason I came to this hour. (TS98) John 12:28 “Father, esteem Your Name.” Then a voice came from the heaven, “I have both esteemed it and shall esteem it again.” (TS98) John 12:29 So the crowd who stood by and heard it were saying there had been thunder. Others said, “A messenger has spoken to Him.” (TS98)
In this verse John 12:24, Yeshua tells us unless a grain falls into the ground and dies, in other words the grain must die to bear fruit, in this Yeshua speaks of his impending death, as he himself says "what shall I say father save me from this hour" and then continues with " but for this reason I came to this hour", in other words he came to die on the cross, by this he would glorify his father Yehovah. The reason he came is evidenced by Allah (Yehovah) himself by his speaking from heaven, there is no better evidence then the father himself Allah (Yehovah) speaking out for his son
Heb 2:14 Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself similarly shared in the same, SO THAT BY MEANS OF HIS DEATH HE MIGHT DESTROY HIM HAVING THE POWER OF DEATH, THAT IS, THE DEVIL, (TS98) Heb 2:15 and deliver those who throughout life were held in slavery by fear of death. (TS98) Heb 2:16 For, doubtless, He does not take hold of messengers, but He does take hold of the seed of Aḇraham. (TS98) Heb 2:17 SO IN EVERY WAY HE HAD TO BE MADE LIKE HIS BROTHERS, in order to become a compassionate and trustworthy High Priest in matters related to Elohim, to make atonement for the sins of the people. (TS98) Heb 2:18 For in what He had suffered, Himself being tried, He is able to help those who are tried. (TS98)
in hebrews 2:14 It tells us that "so that by means of His death He might destroy him having the power of death, that is, the devil,: In this we can clearly see that it is by means of his death that he rendered the devil powerless (the greek word for this destroy here actually means to rebder idle or useless) and this is what he did By dying as a completely innocent man he died for all because he obeyed Allh (Yehovah) till death on a cross (Phil 2:8). The reason go much further but this the basics, when you understand how this was done you will see Allah's (Yehovah's) wisdom is beyond question. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 25 July 2018 at 9:25pm
Hi 'jp the unitarian', Glad to know you are a Unitarian. Well, at least, you don’t believe Jesus is God or equal to God. Nevertheless, you do believe Jesus came to die for the sins of mankind. If you read the Bible carefully AND without the preconceived mindset that Jesus died for the sins of mankind, you will clearly see that Jesus NEVER did or intended to say he came to die for the sins of mankind nor did he ever said he was crucified and resurrected. As a Unitarian Christian, I would think, you should, first and foremost, believe in the Words of God, then followed by the teaching of His prophets, and you, like the Muslims, must also believe that a chosen prophet of God would NEVER say or do anything that would be in contradiction to God’s Words or against His Decree. In Ezekiel 18:20, God told Ezekiel, “The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.” In Psalm 49:7, we are told “No man can by any means redeem his brother or give to God a ransom for him”. Still in Deuteronomy 24:16, we are told “Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin”. In other words, God Almighty had clearly declared no man can sacrifice his life for another man’s sin. If this is so, do you think a faithful servant and a prophet of God like Jesus would think he could sacrifice his life and die for the sins of ALL mankind ?? Obviously not. If Jesus would not go against any Commands or Decree of God, then, obviously, the verses you quoted, such as John 12:24 and John 12:27 are misunderstood or misinterpreted. The context of John 12:24 is similar to the context of John 15:5. In John 15:5, Jesus talked about the need of his people to be within the guiding circle of his preaching for them to reap (later) rewards (bear fruits) and he used the analogy of the branch and the vine, saying the branch need to remain attached to the vine for it to bear fruits. Similarly, in John 12:24, Jesus used the analogy of a wheat seed, saying, the seed need to be detached (fall out) from its main stalk in order for it to produce more seeds (bear more fruits). From these 2 analogies, you can begin to see the 2 main criteria, as outlined by Jesus, for one to truly understand and benefit from his teaching – one, his disciples need to constantly remain within his guidance (just as a branch need to be attached to its vine to bear fruits) and second, sacrifices are required by messengers/prophets of God to achieve bigger and greater rewards for mankind (just as a seed need to be detached or fall out, to produce more seeds). Sacrifices here refer to the abuses, persecutions, sufferings, rejections, etc that prophets of God must endure in their quest to bring the message of God to the people and yes, in some cases, they are killed for just preaching the message of God. Was there anything about ‘Jesus MUST or NEED TO DIE for man’s sin’ in John 12 ?? No, it was only perceived as such because of a preconceived mindset that Jesus died for the sins of mankind. What about John 12:27 where Jesus said it was for this reason that he came to this hour ?? Well, what ‘reason’ did Jesus come for and find himself in that critical ‘hour’ ?? Obviously, Jesus knew the Jews wanted to get rid of him and thus, he did EXPECT to be arrested, falsely charged and sentence to death. In other words, Jesus expected to be killed and clearly he had accepted his fate, not to his own will but, to the Will of God if that is so, but, was Jesus willing to die ?? Again, obviously not as if that is so, he would not have prayed to God earnestly to save him from his ordeal and he would not have questioned the Jews for wanting to kill him when all he did was preaching the truth from God (John 8:40). So, if Jesus was not willing to die and he questioned the Jews for wanting to kill him, then, what ‘reason’ was Jesus referring to when he said “But for this reason I came to this hour” ?? The obvious ‘reason’ Jesus was referring to was the reason he was sent to the Israelites and that is, to bring them out of their sinning ways and guide them back into the path of eternal life. It’s for this reason, he was abused, persecuted as many saw his preaching and teaching as a threat to their own ways as taught by their fathers and forefathers and so on, and thus, it’s for this reason, Jesus found himself in that ‘hour’. As for Hebrew 2 verses you quoted, well, those are NOT the Words of God Almighty nor are those the words or the teachings of His prophet, Jesus. So, you should not be believing and accepting the words and teachings of other people without first validating their words/teachings with the Words of God Almighty or the teaching of His prophets like Jesus. Didn’t Jesus say to test all spirits and not to simply accept their words ?? |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 01 August 2018 at 11:56pm
Have you ever read the Bible from cover to cover? It doesn’t appear so, but If so, you need to read it again and that way you will begin to understand verses in their overall literary context. Rather than you wasting time choosing random verses that are easy to be viewed idiomatically, I suggest you spend your time applying your self to the discipline of hermeneutics, (definition- the branch of knowledge that deals with interpretation, especially of the Bible or literary texts.). From this you will learn about the “canons of interpretation” which are essential to understand and apply if there is to be any hope of you getting to the truth if you ever read the Bible. You need to understand the Bible contains language used for every purpose for which language is designed. There is narration, lists, salutations, conversation, poetry, song, fiction, parable, allegory, history, prayer, etc. Principles of interpretation vary according to which of these literary forms a passage is written in.Anyway let me outline some canons of interpretation for you. Firstly there is the rule of DEFINITION: What does the word mean? Secondly the rule of USAGE or TARGET AUDIENCE.ie who was it written for. Then there is the rule of HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The interpreter must have some awareness of the life and society of the times in which the Scripture was written. The rule of LOGIC: Interpretation is merely logical reasoning. When interpreting Scripture, the use of reason is everywhere to be assumed. Does the interpretation make sense? The rule of PRECEDENT:
We must not violate the known usage of a word and invent another for which
there is no precedent. The rule of
UNITY: The parts of Scripture being interpreted must be construed with
reference to the significance of the whole. An interpretation must be
consistent with the rest of Scripture. An excellent example of this is the
doctrine of the Trinity. No single passage teaches it, but it is consistent
with the teaching of the whole of Scripture (e.g. the Father, Jesus, and the
Holy Spirit are referred to individually as God; yet the Scriptures elsewhere
teach there is only one God). The rule of
INFERENCE: An inference is a fact reasonably implied from another fact. It is a
logical consequence. It derives a conclusion from a given fact or premise. It is
the deduction of one proposition from another proposition. THE RULE OF
INTERPRETING THE BIBLE LITERALLY (or normally) allowing for normal use of
figurative language. Take the plain meaning of the text at face value. When the
literal does not make sense you probably have a figure of speech. Use the Bible
to help interpret itself. Interpret difficult passages with clear ones. This is
sometimes called the law of non-contradiction. It will only be figurative if
both the textual context and overall literary context indicates it. In your posts you have demonstrated flaws in many of the above canons of interpretation .ie. context, usage / target audience, logic, precedent, unity, inference, literal interpretation and target audience. The Bible was not written for unbelievers, but for those willing to search diligently for the truth. Some of the language of Scripture is written with the specific intent of confounding those like yourself who either do not have ears willing to hear or who are unwilling to be diligent in their study (Prov. 2:1-5; 25:2; Matt. 13:10-13). You ask why do I
think a Muslim would quote a Biblical verse ? And what’s my criteria to
determine “truth and lies” ? This is your problem not mine. As you have been
the one quoting the Bible but you believe it is not reliable the onus is on you
to explain what is “truth and what is lies”. And you don’t seem sure of
yourself considering you have moved the goal posts for first saying there was
only one reason and then contradicting yourself by trying to broaden your defence
with a second reason. Like I say the onus of explanation is on you. Are you saying that I
only take John 15.5 because I have a biased interpretation? As I have
demonstrated above I understand the ‘canons of interpretation’ better than you.
Because I have read
the Bible from cover to cover in its total literary context I have a better
understanding of what is literal or what is figurative than you. You do not
have the overall literary context or see how adequately to apply the principles
of usage, logic, precedent, unity, inference, literal interpretation and target
audience. As a result of the
above your idiomatic interpretation of John 15.5 is faulty. To “remain in me”,
means …. to remain in ME. If Jesus had meant to say “continue in my preaching”
he would have said … “continue in my
preaching”. But he didn’t. Just stick to
how it reads and quit trying to reinterpret it. And “Guidance circle”? what on
earth is a “guidance circle” . Whats
more you have not even addressed or refuted John 10.30 and 17.21. Regarding John 11.25
your explanation is rambling. Also read on to John 11:27 where Martha says - “Yes, Lord,” she replied, “I believe that you are the Messiah, the
Son of God, who is to come into the world.” What does this mean.
It means Martha recognises Jesus as … The Son of God and the Messiah. And any
one who knows the Jewish prophesies regarding the Messiah knows The Messiah has
divine and eternal qualities. This is far more than just Jesus saying he is a
“sign of the resurrection”. You make the mistake
of ignoring the canon of interpretation in viewing a verse in the context of
its target audience. The target audience here is Jewish. Not Muslim or
Christian and Martha knew exactly what Jesus was saying and that it was than
just a “sign”. You make further
mistakes of interpretation by not ignoring the canons of unity and taking a
verse literally at face value without cause to view it as a figure of speech.
Jesus did not say “I am a prophet of God and a sign of the resurrection. He
said I am The Son of God and The Resurrection and the Life. No matter how you
try to ramble the clarity of this away, it doesn’t change what he said. In regards to the
rule of interpretation of unity cross reference to John 6:40, John 8.58 and
Exodus 3.14. The "I am" reference in John's Gospel offer a clear look
at Christ's identity. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and
believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the
last day.” John 6.40. In John 8:58, he
answered the religious leaders, saying, "Truly, Truly, I say to you,
before Abraham was, I am." This was a clear reference to Exodus
3:14, where God revealed His name to Moses as "I AM." As stated earlier the
reason the religious leaders wanted to kill Him was because Jesus claimed to be
The Son of God. In regards to the use
of a small ‘s’ or a capital ‘S’ I have proven through the Greek I understand it
better than you and the word is “huios” means … Son … not servant ! The
large or small s in the English is irrelevant. You have not even referred to
the original Greek or Hebrew in your arguments. In regards to what
verses you have been unable to refute, the answer is all of them. The best you
have been able to do is resort to idiomatic convoluted riddles without adhering
to the canons associated with scriptural interpretation. You ask what
contradictions exist between what Jesus said and Muslim doctrine. The answer
being – Christ Jesus The Messiah as The Son of God was crucified and resurrected.
This conflicts with Muslim doctrine. You ask should I
believe what other people claimed of what Jesus said in the Bible. The answer
is yes. Of course. The writers of the Gospels were eye witnesses, or drew on
eye witness accounts. Why would I believe a Muslim version of events that only
came more than 600 years later. You ask for my
elaboration that sin goes deeper than mere disobedience. As already explained
sin is actually a “state of being”. Ive already explained this to you with the
relevant verses in depth in our discussions on the doctrine of original sin. You ask about a
seeming contradiction where you say “if
Jesus is God the Son, so there must be 2 Gods, but Jesus said God is one”.
Perhaps an analogy would be helpful. Think of the sun in the sky. The sun has
heat and light. Heat and light are different but come from the same source.
They are different but One. You asked who was
talking about the world not being a 50/50 playing field. The answer being – me.
As already explained the doctrine of original sin is only a … doctrine. And I
have given many biblical verses where it is implicitly inferred. You have not
even addressed them let alone refute them. Regarding Luke 11.13
it was me that quoted it in the first place, so why are you asking me to read
it in context with all of Luke 11 ? beside the context of Luke 11 doesn’t
change Luke 11.13. Regarding original
sin and it never being preached by Jesus I have explained many times to you
this is simply a doctrine based on implicit revelation, not explicit
revelation. I broke down the
Hebrew in Proverbs 22.15 and your only response then was “rambling conjecture”
rather than addressing the evidence. And as well as provide you with relevant
verses around the doctrine of original sin I have provided a detailed
explanation in the Greek terms of poneroi hyparchon-tes. You have not been able
to refute what I have provided and simply made a pathetic response of “reading
scriptures out of context” and now a response of repeating what other people preach to me and not what
Jesus preaches. Like I say you have not been able to refute Proverbs 22.15 or
the Greek terms of poneroi hyparchon-tes. This is all in the Bible. Not what
other “people have preached to me”. Besides this is hypocritical special
pleading on your behalf as you have not proven to me where Mohamad said “I am
the Comforter”. You ask if I
understand why Jesus’ words can be taken figuratively or literally, depending
on the literary context, then why can’t I understand that Bible can also be a
book of truth and lies, depending on the context and whose sayings are being
narrated. That’s my point. If you were to take the time to read the Bible in
its totality and apply canons of interpretation, understanding the Bible is
straight forward. Besides you are confusing figurative truth with literal
truth. They are both truth. No lies about it. Regarding John 10.34
you ask exactly who was making the claims of Jesus claiming to be God? Jesus
himself ? The answer is yes. Jesus said
it implicitly ( definition - suggested
though not directly expressed) not
explicitly. The Jewish elders simply confirmed what he was saying. So what Im
saying is that if Jesus said it implicitly and the Jewish elders confirmed it
in their response then your claim that Jesus never said it is not true. And your point that
if people claim that I claim to be Satan then it must be true, is ignorant of
the fact that Jesus proved himself through miracles, wonders and signs and the
fulfilment of prophesy. That’s the difference. And as I have said
should I believe what other people claimed of what Jesus said in the Bible. The
answer is yes. The writers of the Gospels were eye witnesses, or drew on eye
witness accounts. Why would I believe a Muslim version of events that only came
more than 600 years later. I have adequately
proven that in the Greek the word is “huios” means Son … not servant. And all
you can say is “capitalizing all the letters as ‘S-O-N’ don’t make Jesus God
the Son – never did and never will.” You miss the point. Im not even talking
about a capital S but the Greek word “huios”. Let me ask you a question. What
does the Greek word ‘huios” mean. Does it mean son or servant ? Can you answer
that ? Your further
elaboration on John 10.36 is based on a faulty premise. Jesus simply quoted
Psalm 82.6 as a means of explaining his Sonship to the Jewish elders. If you are wondering why the Jews accused him
of blasphemy even though it is written in their law you need to remember that
Jesus understood their law better than them, but also many of them who did know
their law believed Jesus fulfilled their law. All of Jesus’s first believers
were Jews. My point about your
hypocrisy in you using capitals in English stands. Your attempt to discredit the “gospelists”
influence on my understanding falls apart when one refers to the original
languages of Hebrew and Greek. I have explained many
times you need to refer to the original Hebrew or Greek, not the English.
Rather than referring to capitals you need to refer to the Hebrew term “Adonay”
and you have not explained why would the “us” be the people of King Uzziah when
He is asking Isaiah to go and preach to people of King Uzziah ? Regarding Isaiah 53
the site you have linked to is a Jewish site and not a Christian site as you
claim! Apart from stating Jesus first believers were Jews who fully understood
Isaiah 53 I could explain Isaiah in more depth to you but Im not sure I can be
bothered considering you cant even do your home work properly. You need to take
better care in referencing your links! As I have said while
there is a link between Mathew 3.17 and Isaiah 42.1 the point of this
discussion is whether the “ gospelists ” as you call them, have any Old
Testament precedent to refer to Jesus as the Son of God. I take it you are
arguing that the doctrine that Jesus was the Son of God was invented by the
early Christians and that the God of the Old Testament had no Son ? If so you
must understand there are a number of Old Testament verses that speak of God's
Son. For example Isaiah 9:6-7, Micah 5:1-2, Isaiah 7:14, and Proverbs 30:4. And
as much as you may wish to contend these verses they are indicative that
Christian doctrine regarding the Sonship of Jesus has a basis ( contestable or
not ) on the Old Testament and is more than just a theological bias of the “
gospelists”. Also as I previously
told you Christians have been well aware since the beginning of Christianity he
is also a servant. Being a servant and being the "Son of God" are not
mutually exclusive. The term "servant" does not mean that Jesus, who
is God The Son cannot serve the people whom God the Father sent him to redeem.
This is clarified further in Mathew 20.28 - "just
as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life
a ransom for many," (Mathew 20:28). The purpose of the Son of
God is to serve. Interesting Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man here in
reference to the Son of Man in Daniel 7.13. Regarding Daniel 7 you
don’t seem to understand the historical time difference between the Old
Testament Book of Daniel and what Jesus was referring to in Daniel 7.13. If you
knew that you would know Jesus could not possibly have been speaking in Daniel
7.13 because he wasn’t born until centuries later. And of course it as a dream.
That is obvious. God often spoke to prophets through dreams. So the point being
Jesus came to serve by being a ransom. Not just preaching like a normal
prophet. And the human figure referred to in Daniels dream has eternal and
divine qualities. In my statement of
Isaiah 40.3 and Psalm 2.7 being closer to Mathew 3.17 my point was about the
Messianic theme not the actual text. Psalm 2.7 needs to be read in the context
of the Davidic Covenant. Read on to Psalm 2:8 and you will note David never did
receive the nations as an inheritance or the ends of the earth as a possession.
That was and is reserved for the Messiah who is the line of David. This was
further validated when Jesus confirmed his own status, even over that of King
David, when he questioned the Pharisees saying “What do you think about the
Messiah? Whose son is He?” (Matt 22.42 -45). Here Jesus answered His own
question by quoting Psalm 110.1, and concluded “If David calls Him ‘Lord,’ how
then can the Messiah be his Son?” (22.45); Jesus was David’s Son by lineage,
and yet David’s Lord by position (Mathew 22.44). Jesus’ reasoning is this: “Son
of David” is your title for the Messiah, yet David himself calls Him “Lord.”
The Messiah, then, must be much more than just a son—a physical descendant—of
David. So let me put the same question to you. If David calls Him ‘Lord,’ in
Psalm 110.1 how then can the Messiah be his Son? Anyway like I say as
much as you may wish to contend these verses they are indicative that Christian
doctrine regarding the Sonship of Jesus has a basis ( contestable or not ) in
the Old Testament and is more than just a fanciful construction of the “
gospelists”. Your response
regarding Luke 22.42 only reflects your limited ability to read the Bible in
context and interestingly it also displays an inability to understand Islam.
You say Jesus expected “to be put on a
false trial and put to death by crucifixion”. You don’t seem to realise Muslims
don’t even believe Jesus was crucified ! And yes sure Jesus
prayed to God to remove the sufferings and about the whole ordeal of his predicament.
However you need to remember the whole point to this in which you will grasp if
you read the Book of Luke in its entirety, is the reason Jesus was crucified
was due to the Chief Priests accusing him of blasphemy. You have provided no
proof the Chief Priests did not believe this.
Can I explain what
Jesus meant by” not my will be done but your will be done”. Sure it
demonstrates the dynamic between the human and divine elements of Jesus. The
hypo -static union. You ask if Im telling
you Jesus was accused of blasphemy as the Son of God in Luke 22.66. Yip. That’s
right. Read on to 22.71 and it obvious. Read it for yourself - “At daybreak the council of the elders of the people, both the chief
priests and the teachers of the law, met together, and Jesus was led before
them. “If you are the Messiah,” they said, “tell us.” Jesus answered, “If I
tell you, you will not believe me, and if I asked you, you would not answer. But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the
mighty God.” They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?” He replied, “You say
that I am.” Then they said, “Why do we need any more testimony? We have heard it
from his own lips.” Luke 22:71 You say Jesus is not
God the Son because he said in Luke 22.70 that it was them saying it and not
him. Once again you demonstrate you have not read the Bible from cover to cover
to appreciate the overall literary context. You need to cross reference to
Mathew 22.42 – 45.-“He (Jesus) questioned
the Pharisees saying “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is He?” (Matt 22.42 -45). Anyway the point here being that both Pilate and the
Sanhedrin all took it as a lack of denial from Jesus that he was making Himself
equal to God. It was enough for them all to have him condemned. You are wrong in
saying Jesus most of the times spoke in parables. Obviously you haven’t read
the Gospels. He often spoke in parables, and not just the Jewish elders, but
mostly he did not speak in parables at all. You accuse Christians of always taking
the Bible literally. As I explained at the start, there is a rule to interpret
the Bible literally but allowing for normal use of figurative language. Take
the plain meaning of the text at face value. When the literal does not make
sense you probably have a figure of speech. It will only be figurative if both
the textual context and overall literary context indicates it. Most Muslims are just
like New Age Pagans and mentally unwell people when they come to interpret the
Bible. Their overly figurative approach is an attempt to forcibly twist it to
fit their own ideas which only turns it into a fairy tale. You have provided no
scriptural evidence to prove the Chief Priests did not believe Jesus was guilty
of blasphemy. I have however. All you have is a conspiracy theory. As to who wrote the
Gospel of John there is strong evidence John the disciple wrote the Gospel. But
whether he did or not it was still based on eye witness accounts that go back
to the ministry of Jesus. For you to even tentatively consider that John the
Baptist may have written it betrays your ignorance. As I said these eye witness
accounts have far my credibility than you. You ask which sayings
of Jesus, directly or indirectly implied
he was claiming to be God. Have you even be reading the posts I send ? Talk
about “ always hearing but never perceiving ” (Mathew 13.14). Anyway, refer to
John 6.35, Mathew 12.40, John 2.19, 6.40, 10.9, 11.25-27,14.6, 15.5,
8.58,5.24-30,10.34 – 36. Plus there were all the references Jesus made to
Daniel 7.13 as the eternal Son of Man. In regards to me
missing the fact that Jesus said, “By
myself I can do nothing … I think you missed the earlier outlined fact
about the hypostatic Union. You say if he’s
killed for blasphemy then, he’s not God, but only someone who claimed to be
God, which was what the Jews accused him of. So you agree then, he claimed to
be God ? You ask can God be killed ? Jesus was God The Son in human form. The
human form died but rose again. You are the one
making the claim the Jews and Romans wanted to kill Jesus for simply preaching
to them to worship only the One true God whom he called ‘Father’. As you are
the one making this claim, and that it is different from the Christian
interpretation, then the onus is on you to provide the proof. Also your
argument fails because you forget the Jews already did worship God The Father.
So why would they accuse Jesus of blasphemy for preaching to worship God The
Father? You need to stop interpreting
the Bible with your Muslim sunglasses on. I would have thought
that you as the Bible expert would know the story of Jonah and that the Jewish
Temple was the centre of Jewish atonement rituals. Jesus said in Mathew
12.40 – “ just as Jonah was three days
and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so the Son of Man will be
three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. “ And in John 2.19 he
said – "Destroy this
temple, and I will raise it again in three days." And yes, it was Jesus
that said that. In these two statements Jesus was alluding to his death and
resurrection 3 days later. Again just take your Muslim sunglasses off. And as you continue
to argue against the validity of the “gospelists” lets return to this in the
light of the Quran. As I have stated you have no basis to question the validity
of the Gospels / Injel due to your Quran
stating the Gospels / Injel are truth. You say regarding the
New Testament that the Quran only confirms the Gospels / Injel but our current
Gospels are not the reliable originals. What you don’t appear to realise is the
modern Gospels we have today are exactly as they were before your “prophet”
Mohamad was even born. Just look to the Diatessaron and Muratorian fragment if
you want proof. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatessaron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muratorian_fragment And its pretty rich
of you to say the oldest Biblical manuscripts are copies not the originals when
Muslims don’t have original copies of the Quran. Remember? Uthman burnt them
all ! What exactly was Uthman hiding ? Evidence points to more than version of
your Quran ‘miracle book’ that Uthman had to standardise. You may be interested
to know the oldest and most comprehensive Quran found in Sanaa in the 1970s
doesn’t line up with your standard modern version. Any way good luck in trying
to twist and riddle around in explaining the “truth and lies” in the Injel. In regards to your
claim Mathew 28.19 is a verse that was added later there is no evidence for
this either from the earliest manuscript evidence or from the writings of the
early church leaders. The Bible is the most reliable of any ancient writing.
There are more ancient copies in existence than any other ancient writing, for
example the Roman history of Julius Caesar, and others. Plus these copies cover
a huge and wide geographic area that prevents them from being gathered together
and falsified. there are more than 24,000 partial and complete manuscript
copies of the New Testament. There are also some 86,000 quotations from the
early church fathers and several thousand Lectionaries (church-service books
containing Scripture quotations used in the early centuries of Christianity).
There are enough quotations from the early church fathers that even if we did
not have a single copy of the Bible, scholars could still reconstruct all but
11 verses of the entire New Testament from material written within 150 to 200
years from the time of Christ. In regards to any
contradiction with Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor.
1:13-15 it is not important. While baptism is a sacrament in many churchs it is
not a core biblical doctrine for salvation. An interesting point around this is
to ask in what name to John The Baptist baptised Jesus ? This is a mystery
which only proves not to get too dogmatic about baptism. While your borrowing
from Christian theological and debate is interesting you would not even have
this information if it were not for the transparency and robustness of
Christian debate. Compare this to Islam.
In Islam if such debate were to occur then people would have been accused of
apostasy and executed by now. This just shows the open mindedness of the
Christian world compare to the closed and insecure Muslim world. And like I said
earlier regarding the unreliability of the Quran. Muslims don’t have original
copies of the Quran due to Uthman burning them due to variances and the oldest and
most comprehensive Quran found in Sanaa in the 1970s doesn’t line up with your
standard modern version proving its unreliability. Regarding Mathew
20.19 Jesus did more than just expect to be arrested and condemned to death. He
explained it to them in depth to the point he even knew he would be raised
again on the third day. And tell me just what
is the point in me needing to show you that when Jesus said he will be betrayed
and killed, he was totally unaware that the Jews hated him and wanted to
capture and kill him ? What on earth are you talking about ? Quit your evasive
quibbling and just admit You are wrong in saying Jesus meant he had to suffer,
not about the crucifixion, but as all prophets endured sufferings, persecutions
or death. Mathew 20.19 clearly proves you wrong. Mathew 5.12 simply adds a
wider context to Mathew 20.19. Mathew 20.19 is far more precise and detailed
than Mathew 5.12. Regarding proof from
the Quran where Mohamad himself said he was the Comforter. Its true. I don’t
believe in the Quran. But that’s not the point. I challenged you for proof in
terms of your own Muslim scriptures that Mohmad directly said “I am the
comforter”. Where is it? Can you show it or not? If not your position is
hypocritical special pleading in expecting the same from Christians. I’m
waiting. Your use of Christian
scripture to correct a perceived lack of understanding implies a degree of
objective integrity. However to use Christian scripture to support a Muslim
proposition is circular reasoning as I have discussed above. Let me define
circular reasoning for you. Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando,
"circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical
fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The
point being here you analyse the Bible with the premise the Quran is true. So
any analysis of the Bible must end with the Quran as true. You are unable to
remove your Muslim bias to approach truth with an open mind. Any analysis with
integrity would not start with such a premise. It should begin with an
objective open mind and focus on the textual integrity of a manuscript, the
history associated with it, ethics and previous revealed truth. You are not
doing this. Your whole argument from the beginning has been biased with your
Muslim perspective. And who are you to
say truth for Christians must be in
accordance with what Jesus himself said and not what other people said. Who are
you to tell Christians how to approach truth when you don’t even understand
canons of interpretation ? You ask which
teachings of Jesus are not in accordance with Muslim doctrine. Yip that’s right
that he (Jesus) as God the Son died for the sins of mankind. Refer to my points
above. Regarding Mohamad as
a violent tribal war lord you need to know hadith were evaluated and gathered
into large collections during the 8th and 9th centuries. These works are
referred to in matters of Islamic law and history to this day. Hadith are
categorized as �£aḥīḥ (sound, authentic), ḍaʿīf (weak), or mawḍūʿ (fabricated).
Other classifications used also include: ḥasan (good) and the science in
categorising them is sound and sophisticated. Other factors that contribute to the credibility
of a piece of a hadith rather than just the chain of transmission (isnad) is
the time line or timeliness of scholarly compilation of such writings is
important as an example. So don’t try to minimise their importance
Jerry. The hadith I quoted to you about Mohamad having his enemies tortured was
Sahih Bukhari which is the most reliable of hadith. I agree the moral
characteristics of Mohamad are well documented in the Quran. For example his
violence, his marriage to a 9 year old girl when he was in his 50s and his
sanctioning his men to take women sex slaves ! the point being there was
nothing special about Mohamad. There was nothing particularly Godly about him
to give him the title ‘prophet’. He was simply a man of his times. In saying the violent
verses in the Quran should only be viewed in the historical context of the day is
an admission from you that your Quran is not the absolute Word of God for all
times to all people! In regards to Jesus
fulfilling the verses about the Messiah and God becoming man. Please refer to
Daniel 7, Isaiah 53, Psalm 2.7-8, Isaiah 9:6-7, Micah 5:1-2, Isaiah 7:14, and
Proverbs 30:4 Prophetic meaning
regarding Jeremiah 8.8 ?! What are you talking about prophetic meaning ? There
is no prophesy associated with Jeremiah 8.8 You say the Bible
made no mention the scribes had truly abandoned their traditions of editing
what they are copying from the original. What you fail to see is that it was
only one group of scribes being referred to by Jeremiah. You need to know that
other godly men also had copies of the Torah in their possession. Eg. the
prophet Daniel. Plus other prophets affirm that the book of Moses was still
available during their day.eg. Nehemiah 8:13-14,18. This occurred approximately
430 B.C., nearly 180 years after Jeremiah. Also Jeremiah said …“
If you do not listen to me and follow MY LAW …. So how could Israel follow the
Law, i.e. the Torah, if it had been corrupted? Jeremiah 26:4-6 Even Jeremiahs
enemies knew that the Law could never disappear. Jeremiah 18:18. If you read Jeremiah
36: 1-7, 20-32, 27-32.You will see that If God was capable of restoring the
revelation given to Jeremiah after it had been destroyed, then God would also
have been capable of restoring the original Torah. Finally Jesus / Isa
(PBUH) quoted from the Torah as we know it today and never thought that it was
corrupt (cf. Matthew 4:4,7,10; 22:31-32d.3. And in terms of
Matthew 28:19 I have already addressed this above. Plus I have adequately
proven the transmission of the New Testament is incredible reliable as also
mentioned above. Also as mentioned if
you want to make allegations against the Bible remember the Quran is not
reliable. Muslims don’t have original copies of the Quran. Uthman burnt them
all ! Evidence points to more than version of your Quran ‘miracle book’ that
Uthman had to standardise. As I said the oldest in most comprehensive Quran
found in Sanaa in the 1970s doesn’t line up with your standard modern version
proving it is not reliable. Your claim that Jesus
was motivated not to fight as he knew it would be suicidal is nothing but pure
conjecture. I have already proven to you Jesus said to love ones enemies and
“he who lives by the sword dies by the sword” Mathew 26.52 . Also refer to
Mathew 16.23 and 5.44. My argument is supported by scripture. Your response has
no scriptural basis and as well as being hypothetical is defensive in tone
which only proves you cannot refute it. In terms of Jesus
saying to “love ones enemies” and telling his disciples to get swords there is
no contradiction. And I’ve already explained why Jesus asked his followers to
get swords. Not for violent reasons. Who are you to say
true prophesies are not fulfilled intentionally? What’s your criteria for
prophecy ? You thought Jeremiah 8. 8 is a prophecy when it obviously isn’t.
Jesus is obviously more qualified than you to define what is and what is not
prophecy. Also you forget Jesus said a number of times he would consciously
fulfil prophecy. Take his baptism by John the Baptist for instance in Matthew 3:13-16. 13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John.
14 But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do
you come to me?” Jesus replied, “Let it be so
now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfil all righteousness.” Obviously Jesus knew
he had to consciously act in a way to “fulfil all righteousness.” Anyway it is obvious
Jesus was referring to the prophecy of Isaiah 53:12 when he instructed his
disciples to get swords. For I tell you that this Scripture must
be fulfilled in Me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what
is written about Me is reaching its fulfilment.” So they said, “Look, Lord,
here are two swords.” “That is enough,” He answered. Luke 22.37 -38 Interesting he said
two swords are enough. Not exactly enough for a revolution is it? Also see he said “this scripture must be
fulfilled in me “ Just because you don’t like the answer is no reason to keep
quibbling about it. As I said Jesus is obviously more qualified than you to
define what is and what is not prophecy. The hypothetical conjecture is all
yours. I’ve provided the scriptural basis to my position. You have provided
nothing! So coming back to
your question was Jesus ever a transgressor in his lifetime on earth and if so,
how was he a transgressor? He was counted as a transgressor because he
instructed his disciples to get swords (only two! ) to be classified as a law
breaker, he was accused of blasphemy and he was crucified between two
criminals. Is my argument silly
that maybe Jesus didn’t want them to pull a sword because he might have dropped
it on his foot and they didn’t have ambulances back then? Sure its silly. As Im
sure you are aware it is a simple illustration of how your idiomatic,
figurative interpretation of the Bible just leads into a silly fairy tale in
what ever direction a person wants to take it for their own purposes. Am I saying Jesus who
would never ask his disciples to get swords as “he who lives by the sword dies
by the sword” ? Yes. And not just because of that Biblical verses but others as
well. And don’t play games with Isaiah
53.12 in him instructing his disciples to get swords. There is no contradiction
her when you consider his motives. You are just quibbling and being evasive
because you can’t refute it. You are wrong in
saying Jesus never set an example not to fight. He said it implicitly rather
than explicitly in John 18.10 -11, Mathew 5.44 and Mathew 26.52. Also please refer to
Luke 22:49 -51 where Jesus demonstrated his pacificism by healing the servants
ear. - When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord,
should we strike with our swords And one of them struck the servant of the high
priest, cutting off his right ear. But Jesus answered, “No more of this!”
And he touched the man’s ear and healed him. Luke 22:49 -51. Your use of non
Sequitur is a fact. You have provided no scriptural basis to your position or
refuted the verses I have provided. I have provided John 18.10, Mathew 5.44, Luke 22:49 -51 and Mathew 26.52.
Please refute them and provide your own alternative argument based on
scripture. I await your response. Regarding Christian
pacificism and “loving ones neighbour”. Hey guess what I’m guilty of a
typo! It wasn’t love ones neighbour that
he said. He said, “love ones enemy”. Extremely high ethics there. Can
Mohamad match that? No. And whether loving
ones neighbours or ones enemy is the second most important commandment or not
is not the point. The point being Jesus never had ideas of violent revolution
as you try to claim. And in regards to the
Muslim world being in a mess, refer to below - “Cardiff imam jailed for 13 years after
abusing girls during mosque Quran lessons. Mohammed Haji Saddique sexually
touched the girls as they were reading from the holy book”. Port Coquitlam imam
convicted of sexual assault sentenced to three and a half years in jail.
Saadeldin Bahr prohibited from owning firearms for 10 years, placed on Sex
Offender Registry for 20 years.Roshini Nair · CBC News · Posted: May 22, 2017
12:16 PM PT | Last Updated: May 22, 2017. Moroccan Imam
Sexually Assaults Children in a Mosque By Morocco World News - February 21, 2018. Moroccan Imam Sexually
Assaults Children in a Mosque. By Hajare el Khaldi. Rabat – An imam in
the Temara region has been accused of raping six children inside of a mosque.
Amid the parents’ outrage and the childrens despair, the authorities have
little help to offer. And besides, Muslims
are falling over themselves to leave their failed Muslim countries and migrate
to Western countries. Why is that? Because their Muslim countries have failed
them! You ask Christians
should just smile and watch loved ones be abused and not defend ourselves if
capable ? Much has been written on the ethics of self-defence for Christians
and I could go on for years. However, what I will say is that the whole
Christian life is based on conscience, not outward performance. We all fall
short of the ideal. However the ideal still exists as a goal to work towards. And should the
“Christian nation” of the USA not have
defended itself from Bin Laden after 911 ? What you don’t understand is that
the USA is not a Christian nation. It like all western nations is a secular
nation. Unlike Islam, Christianity makes a separation from religion and state.
Jesus never preached to establish a theocracy ( def - A system of government in
which priests rule in the name of God or a god). The only responsibility on a
government is to maintain law and order and maintain justice. So my point being
“ to turn the other cheek” is a directive for the individual Christian, not the
state government. Any way my advice to
read the Bible from cover to cover and approach the Bible with a clear mind and
read to understand it without the preconceived mindset of your Mullahs. Educate yourself and
follow the canons of interpretation particularly the canon of talking the Bible
literary unless otherwise indicated by the literary or textual context. Your
overly figurative and idiomatic interpretation is similar to psychiatric
patients or New Age Pagans who just want to twist the Bible to suit their own
views. In your posts you have demonstrated flaws in many of the above canons of interpretation .ie. context, usage / target audience, logic, precedent, unity, inference, literal interpretation and target audience. Regarding usage / target audience particularly, the Bible was written for Christ believers, not for unbelievers such as yourself. As a result you lack a scriptural perspective based on a Christ experience. However for those willing to search diligently for the truth you can gain understanding. Some of the language of Scripture is written with the specific intent of confounding those who either do not have ears willing to hear or who are unwilling to be diligent in their study. |
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 05 August 2018 at 6:49am
|
Hi Jerry
there is a lot about the bible that has to be considered when giving a response , now what you have written I do not deny, but your eisegesis right now is a bit trinitarian as it does not consider all the Bible. I am not saying you are trnitarian, but that, as I am sure you would not argue, it is like trinitarians as it is lacking in proof from all the Bible. I do not deny, the verses you have put forth , but what is lacking is a basic understanding of why we die according to the Bible, this I want to explain without dragging it on for forty pages as you would become disinterested and may miss some of what I want to show. As it is clearly written in Hebrews 2:14, and this is what I mean about not considering all of the Bible, Hebrews is clear by his death he cleared us of death. The sin that cuased death to all creation was the sin of Adam .
1Cor 15:22 For AS ALL DIE IN AḎAM, so also all shall be made alive in Messiah . (TS98)
We all die as a result of the sin of Adam, Now while it is true that Yeshua came to die for our sins, it is actually for one sin the sin of Adam, because all sin came into the world by this single sin.
As it is clearly written as you posted
In Ezekiel 18:20, God told Ezekiel, “The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity;
This is all true Each Man can only bear his own crookedness, the only way to clear sin is by the shedding of your blood.
Now let me explain this in the shortest terms possible. It all begins with Adam and Eve when they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they actually took upon themselves the decision of what is good and what is Evil. This is how all sin came into the world, consider it his way, when you make a decision for yourself you set off a chain reaction of decisions that may very well lead to someones death, or not but that is the problem, we do not know what our decision does to our all our brothers on the earth, and our small decision may have far reaching consequences. This is howYeshua differs from us, he did not make his life about his own decisions, but about the fathers guidance, he obeyed the father till death on a cross (Philippians 2:8). He obeyed all the Father's commands (John 12:49-50)
John 12:49 “Because I spoke not from Myself, but THE FATHER WHO SENT ME HAS GIVEN ME A COMMAND, what I should say and what I should speak. (TS98) John 12:50 “And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, AS THE FATHER HAS SAID TO ME, SO I SPEAK.” (TS98)
His actions and his words were guided by the father, in this way he remained completely innocent as the father (Yehovah Allah) knows all outcomes of our decisions he guided Yeshua to complete wisdom and righteousness. In this way, he was completely innocent and could ransom our sin, we cannot do this as we do not follow the commands of the father into all perfection, therefore we do not die sinless no matter how righteous we are. Our blood is tainted and cannot pay for any other sin but our own, Yeshua died sinless, innocent as a Lamb, this why his blood was payment for us, he did bear the sins of his decisions as he followed Yehovah Allah. This Jerry is the path to eternal life and only Yeshua can bring you to Yehovah Allah, not because he was God but Because as a man who could sin, he denide himself completely and submitted himself to the will of Allah Yehovah. This is how all the verses you posted are answered considering all Bible testimony. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 12 August 2018 at 8:33am
|
2Acts, Too bad you have to spend a lot of your quality time to rehash such a long and winded ‘explanation’, ONLY to explain NOTHING !! You claimed to have read the Bible cover to cover BUT what’s the use of reading cover to cover when you hardly can understand what Jesus was saying about himself in the scripture ?? You said to interpret the Bible correctly, one need to understand “the rule of DEFINITION, Secondly the rule of USAGE or TARGET AUDIENCE.ie who was it written for. Then there is the rule of HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The interpreter must have some awareness of the life and society of the times in which the Scripture was written. The rule of LOGIC: Interpretation is merely logical reasoning. When interpreting Scripture, the use of reason is everywhere to be assumed. Does the interpretation make sense? The rule of PRECEDENT: We must not violate the known usage of a word and invent another for which there is no precedent. The rule of UNITY: The parts of Scripture being interpreted must be construed with reference to the significance of the whole. An interpretation must be consistent with the rest of Scripture. An excellent example of this is the doctrine of the Trinity. No single passage teaches it, but it is con-sistent with the teaching of the whole of Scripture (e.g. the Father, Je-sus, and the Holy Spirit are referred to individually as God; yet the Scriptures elsewhere teach there is only one God). The rule of INFERENCE: An inference is a fact reasonably implied from another fact. It is a logical consequence. It derives a conclusion from a given fact or premise. It is the deduction of one proposition from another proposition. THE RULE OF INTERPRETING THE BIBLE LITERALLY (or normally) allowing for normal use of figurative language. Take the plain meaning of the text at face value. When the literal does not make sense you probably have a figure of speech. Use the Bible to help interpret itself. Interpret difficult passages with clear ones. This is sometimes called the law of non-contradiction. It will only be figurative if both the textual context and overall literary context indicates it”. That's all nice and dandy, yet, the fact that you still cannot understand what you read in the Bible, which is clearly evidenced when you cannot interpret Jesus’ words correctly, only proves that you did not apply those criteria you mentioned above in reading your own Bible. If you have done so, your understanding of who Jesus is, will NOT be highly dependent on other people’s perception of who Jesus is. So, educate yourself, read what Jesus said of who he is, and follow the canons of interpretation particularly the canon of talking the Bible literary unless otherwise indicated by the literary or textual context. Can ? |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 12 August 2018 at 8:52am
|
Hi jp the unitarian, Sin simply means to do something against the Command of God. If you decided to abide by the Commands of God, that’s a choice you made and similarly, if you choose to go against God’s Command, that’s a choice you made too. Therefore, sin is a choice you made too. When God created the first man, Adam, God gave man the faculty of intelligence and with that came the power to choose. When Adam decided to eat the forbidden fruit, he made that choice, altho’ he was fully aware God had forbidden him from eating that fruit. That choice became a sin because God had forbidden Adam to eat from that forbidden tree. If God had not forbidden Adam, then, the choice he made (to eat the fruit) would not be a sin. If Adam had not sin (that is, if God did not forbid him from eating the fruit), does it mean mankind too would not have sin ?? Obviously mankind will still sin by going against other Commands of God, irrespective whether Adam had sin or not. In other words, man sin NOT because the first man, Adam had sin (that is, disobey God), but man will sin because of the choices (those which are against God’s Commands) man will and had made, and no man can redeem or die for another man’s sin as only God Almighty can forgive your sin. Like all the other prophets of God, Jesus fully understood this and that’s why he never preached original sin or said he came to literally die for mankind sin. |
Posted By: DavidC
Date Posted: 12 August 2018 at 9:56am
|
Kinda drifting away from Islam here. I would like to know why Jesus is so important to Islam. Why the Qu'ran says 8th Century Christianity was mistaken are secondary, comparative questions. I find lots of issues in the Nestorian and Ebionite Christianities of the Quraysh too. The Qu'ran singles out Jesus as a unique prophet viv-a-vis his role in the final judgment and the end of the world, as well as his connection in the long line of prophecy. Or is that from Bukhari? I get confused. The question for me is, "Why is Jesus an indispensible figure in Islam?". ------------- Christian; Wesleyan M.Div. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 13 August 2018 at 4:47am
Islam does not distinguish between prophets as all known prophets of God are great in their own respective ways and they are all indispensable figures in Islam. They are like jigsaw pieces, without which, you would not be able to complete the final picture or see the final message. Jesus is unique and special because of his virgin birth, that is, he was created without any intervention of a man or in other words, he was born without a biological father. In Islam, Jesus’ virgin birth DOES NOT mean Jesus is literally THE Son of God and God is literally his biological Father, but it’s a testimony that we are witnesses to the Greatness of God in His Creations. Consider this - God created Adam without the involvement of man and woman, He created Eve without the involvement of a woman, He created Jesus without the involvement of a man and He created mankind with the involvement of both man and woman. Thus, Jesus was the final piece in the Greatness of God’s Creative Mind in the creation of man – man was created WITHOUT man and woman (Adam), WITHOUT woman (Eve), WITH man and woman (mankind) and finally WITHOUT man (Jesus). To say God literally had a Son or had fathered a Son is blasphemy as it equates God or compares God with the very nature of a man, when God Almighty is beyond comparison and had no equals (Isaiah 40:12-31). |
Posted By: DavidC
Date Posted: 13 August 2018 at 7:01am
|
Jerry, I assume you are a Muslim. Somehow I thought you were not, but you proclaim Islamic doctrine with authority. Maybe my error. I wish the site would go back to putting religious identification in the id panel. ------------- Christian; Wesleyan M.Div. |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 13 August 2018 at 4:06pm
You have not even addressed let alone refuted any of the points I made! Why ? Because you cant! So what was Jesus saying ? Oh yes I see now, he said ... "there is no god but God and Mohammad is the messenger of God." How silly of me ! How could I not see it ! Not ! Take your Muslim sun glasses off and read the Bible without the influence of your Mullahs and you may learn something.
|
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 13 August 2018 at 4:25pm
You've already had the doctrine of original sin explained to you. See Proverbs 22.15, Luke 11:13,Psalm 14.2-3,Genesis 8.21. And you are wrong in saying he never said he came to die for the sins of mankind. See John 11.25 and 12.44-50. |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 13 August 2018 at 4:42pm
You misunderstand Christian doctrine. Christians do not believe God is literally Jesus's biological Father and biologically fathered a son.
|
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 14 August 2018 at 12:26am
Yes, I am a Muslim, DavidC – a Muslim not by design but by personal choice. I assume you are a Christian by design, meaning, you are a Christian because you were born into a Christian family and thus, follows the faith of your parents - of course, I may be wrong on this. Majority of Muslims worldwide are Muslims by design too and thus, their thoughts, actions, etc, may not reflect the true overall fundamental teaching of Islam. Thus, it’s not surprising (at least, to me) that a research survey on 'the most Islamic-compliant countries in the world' are NOT from Muslim-majority countries - https://www.sabrangindia.in/article/new-zealand-luxemburg-ireland-most-truly-islamic%E2%80%99-countries-world" rel="nofollow - https://www.sabrangindia.in/article/new-zealand-luxemburg-ireland-most-truly-islamic%E2%80%99-countries-world |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 15 August 2018 at 1:32am
You got that wrong, most Muslims are
Muslim by design not personal choice. They are afraid to make a personal
decision away from Islam for fear of apostasy. And most Muslims don’t even know
or read the Quran. The article you posted was
interesting. What was interesting was the quote – “Professor Askari noted that “many
countries that profess Islam and are called Islamic are unjust, corrupt, and
underdeveloped and are in fact not ‘Islamic’ by any stretch of the
imagination.” So Western (Christian / secular) countries are more “Islamic” due to being just, non corrupt, developed and prosperous. And the reasons being due to the stability from their Christian heritage and secular administration. Nothing else. That probably explains why Muslims are falling over themselves to escape failed Muslim societies and live in the West. |
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 22 August 2018 at 11:18am
|
Hi Jerry
I started composing an answer but it was getting too long. So I decided just to ask a couple of questions then,
first question was their death in the garden of eden?
Second why do we die? |
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 26 August 2018 at 12:30pm
|
I quote your response here Hi
jp the unitarian,
Hi Jerry
Well this is the point what I wanted to explain, but let's look at Adam and Eve, in the creation they had two choices
Gen 3:22 And יהוה Elohim said, “See, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever...” (TS98)
Gen 2:17 but do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for in the day that you eat of it you shall certainly die.” (TS98)
The choice between living forever or death, but not immediate death, but death by choices of good and evil. The choice made by Adam and Eve was the knowledge of good and evil, therefore death and since this choice was a sin it is a sin we all inherit when we are born, this is why we die, there was no death before the fall.
Gen 1:29 And Elohim said, “See, I have given you every plant that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed, TO YOU IT IS FOR FOOD. (TS98) Gen 1:30 “And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the heavens, and to every creeping creature on the earth, in which there is life, EVERY GREEN PLANT IS FOR FOOD.” And it came to be so. (TS98)
Animals as well as us humans were to eat only plants and fruits, there was no killing for food. No death, but Adam and Eve chose death instead of eternal life.
Would man have sinned if Adam and Eve would have chosen the tree of eternal life?
Of course not they would have been in perfect accord with the spirit and not able to sin, they would not have had children either, since in the spiritual condition they would have been like Angels, and Angels do not procreate.
Mark 12:25 For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. (ESV2011)
In other words Yehovah would have had to create others, but then this is not what Yehovah wanted, this would have been like making more Angels, so why Man? Why were we given a choice and not angels? Have you ever tried to understand this? It is great when you understand why we are different.
This is the salient point, because of the fall we can make choices but can never know the will of Allah (Yehovah) therefore we sin, since we can unknowingly make the wrong decision that is against his will. This is why there are two parts to the tent of meeting (temple that Moses built) the first part is to pay for intentional sin, these are sins we know about, the second part for sin we did not know about, unintentional sin or sins committed in ignorance.
Heb 9:7 But the high priest alone enters the second room, and he does that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance. (HCSB)
And since we sin we can only cover for our own sin, but can never ever pay for the sin that causes death, the sin or choice of Adam.
You said in your response
and I quote "and no man can redeem or die for another man’s sin as only God Almighty can forgive your sin."
Mark 2:10 “But in order for you to know that the Son of Aḏam possesses authority on earth to forgive sins...” He said to the paralytic, (TS98)
Yeshua by his obedience to Yehovah, had authority given him by Yehovah to forgive sin on earth. There is another problem of misconception you are showing is that if a man cannot redeem in the case of sin, you would be saying that man is of less value than an animal since the blood of a lamb can redeem you. You would also be saying that all the animal sacrifices were of no use,, this would mean Yehovah was lying when he established the law of animal sacrifice for payment of sin, which is completely wrong, animal sacrifices were to atone for sin
Heb 9:13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, (ESV2011) Heb 9:14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. (ESV2011)
this is the gospel also know as the good news was that Yeshua had come to die for your sin, and yes Yeshua did preach it but in deep parables, since Yehovah did not permit him to disclose his mission, knowing that Yehovah commanded all his words, you should understand this.
John 12:47 If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. (ESV2011)
1John 4:9 God’s love was revealed among us in this way: God sent His One and Only Son into the world so that we might live through Him. (HCSB)
How exactly did Yeshua save the world? remember now if you call him a liar here you call Allah a liar. How exactly do we live through a man, how is this done?
The whole problem is you are missing many parts of the Bible in your assessment, yet your own quran tells you that you must follow the Torah of the Hebrew Bible, now how can you follow the Torah, when you do not understand the Torah of sacrifice. Look above and see the problem you have, you have to understand this before you understand the Quran correctly, so let's go through it.
Man cannot atone for the sin of another yet animal sacrifices can? This is not an error, believe me neither is it a contradiction, I can tell you right now I understand the reasons why.
Al 'Imran 3:50. "´(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.
Look at the Quranic verse above Yeshua came to make LAWFUL what was FORBIDDEN, now how can Yeshua change the law of Allah? The answer is in the law of sacrifice when you understand it.
What was now made lawful was because of the sacrifice of Yeshua, by his obedience to the will of Yehovah he could never sin so when he offered himself up for death, he was innocent and had no sin to pay for, that means zero sins to pay for.
Yeshua entered the most holy part of the tent (the second part) and offered his own blood for our redemption. This is why you must understand the law and that there is a true tent in heaven. The tent Moses built was just an earthly copy, and why there two parts to the tent. We can only pay for sin in the first part of the tent with our own blood at death, but can never pay for unintentional sin in the second part of the tent therefore all sins which are unintentional, like the sin of Adam is for us, cannot be payed for, therefore we are stuck in death physical and spiritual.
When Yeshua died he had no sin accounted to him therefore did not have to pay for sin in the first part of the temple, so he went to the second part of the temple and payed for unintentional sin, by this payment he clears the debt owed by Adam for his sin, because he himself inherited this sin by his birth.
Heb 9:11 But Messiah, having become a High Priest of the coming good [matters], through the greater and more perfect Tent not made with hands, that is, not of this creation, (TS98) Heb 9:12 entered into the Most Set-apart Place once for all, not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood, having obtained everlasting redemption. (TS98)
the most set apart place or most holy place is the second part of the tent Where Allah resides. This is how he payed for our sin of Adam by paying for unintentional sin he clears us of the sin of our wrong choices which is unintentional sin and now all we have to do is to be good people, and Fear Allah.
This is also how he is given such a great and high position, by his obedience he is seated at the right hand of Allah, he is the firstborn from the dead, the first one resurrected as we will be. Know and understand the resurrection, which is also in the Quran.
Acts 17:31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” (ESV2011)
Al nisa 4:159. And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death;(665) and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them;-
Yehovah (Allah) will judge the world by a man whom he has appointed. Don't those two verses sound the same,Yeshua being a witness will be part of the judgment.
Look also at what Allah says those who follow Yeshua superior to those who reject faith, faith in who here? This should be faith In Yeshua and what he came to do, by the means of Allah of course.
Al imran 3:55. Behold! Allah said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods)of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.
Al 'Imran 3:3 It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).
The gospel is the good news, it is according to the Quran the criterion for right and wrong now you have to follow the gospel of Yeshua to understand the Quran, since it is the Gospel that is the criterion. Also it is the gospel that interprets the Torah (the book so often mentioned in the Quran) which you are commanded to follow.
Al imran 3:7 He it is Who has sent down to thee THE BOOK: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.
The Bible is hard to understand, but once you start treating it as a book of truth it all adds up and this is in the Quran. The validity of the Quran is through the Bible, the book sent down by Yehovah (Allah), no Bible and the Quran in invalid. |
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 29 August 2018 at 12:06pm
Why would God then waste his time about the virgin birth can you explain this to God? Jesus's birth is only aplicable to only one in mankind history never will it happen again. Why a virgin birth there must be a reasonable explanation for it but for Muslims its a total lost of salvation. Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14 Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call His name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David: And He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of His kingdom there shall be no end." Luke 1:30-33 Micah 5:2 "But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, [though] thou be little among the thousands of Judah, [yet] out of thee shall he come forth unto me [that is] to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth [have been] from of old, from everlasting." “Beth-lehem” is distinguished as “Ephratah” in the land of “Judah.” It was the hometown of David (1 Sam. 17:12) and the birthplace of Jesus (Matt. 2:5). The name Bethlehem means “house of bread” because the area was a grain producing region in Old Testament times. The name Ephratah (“fruitful”), differentiates it from the Galilean town by the same name. The town, known for her many vineyards and olive orchards was small in size, but not in honor. The reaction to the question of the wise men indicates that the Jews believed this prophecy revealed the birthplace of the Messiah. “Ruler in Israel” is a king from David’s line. “From of old, from everlasting”: This speaks of eternal God’s incarnation in the person of Jesus Christ. It points to His millennial reign as King of Kings (Isaiah 9:6). “From everlasting”: clearly indicates the eternality of the One who is to be born at Bethlehem. Thus, Micah’s prophecy adds to that of his contemporary, Isaiah, for Isaiah predicts the means of the ruler’s birth, and Micah predicts the place of His birth. Bethlehem, where Jesus was born, is just outside of Jerusalem about 5 miles. It is a small village. At the time of the deepest sorrow of God's people (they were under Roman rule), God sent the Savior of the world. He was their Messiah. He was their King. He is our Savior. Notice, that Jesus is everlasting. He is the Beginning and the End. Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 02 September 2018 at 3:06am
On the contrary, I have refuted ALL your points, BUT, we all know you cannot even understand your own scripture so how could you understand my refutations of your ‘points’ ?? And yes, that’s very silly of you as how could Jesus have said Muhammad is the Messenger of God when he was long gone before Muhammad was even born ??!! So much for your ‘rule of HISTORICAL BACKGROUND’ as a criteria to understand the Bible !! See what I mean when I said you cannot even understand your own scripture let alone to understand my refutations of your ‘points’?? I guess that's why you keep on ‘parroting’ that I have not addressed or refuted your ‘points’. Nevertheless, Jesus did say “The Lord, your God, the Lord is ONE” meaning there is no god BUT only ONE God Almighty. So, yes, he did say “there’s no god BUT God”. Surely, that's not difficult to understand even for someone like you, or is it ?? So, heed your own advice, take your Christian sun glasses off and read the Bible without the influence of your so-called preachers and scholars (who listen to other people’s words, not Jesus) and you may learn something. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 02 September 2018 at 3:45am
The doctrine of original sin explained to me ??!! Hardly ! But you did confirm how confused you are about sin ! Anyway, let’s go thru the verses you quoted above which you said (or implied) to ‘explain’ original sin – “Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far away” – Proverbs 22:15 This is not about inheriting sin from Adam, but, it’s saying foolishness are (normally) found in children, but discipline can straighten them up. In other words, discipline have to be taught at a young age if not, the foolishness (which is normal expectation in children) will dwell in them and continue into their adulthood. “If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” – Luke 11:13 - How is this about original sin ?? Care to explain ? “The LORD looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God. All have turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one”. – Psalm 14:2-3 Try reading in context from verse 1 – ‘The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good”’. So, Psalm 14:2-3, in general, is also referring to those who do not believe in God, which David refer to as fools, it's NOT a reference to whole mankind. So, how could Psalm 14:2-3 be about original sin when it's addressed only to those who do not believe in God, NOT whole mankind ! Do you believe in God, 2Acts ?? “The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of humans, even though every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done” – Genesis 8:21 ‘Evil’ here is a reference to disobeying God which is what humans are incline to do because to them to obey all of God’s Commands is impossible to do. Truth is it's not impossible as only those who are strong-willed, discipline, have total faith in God Almighty and truly understand God’s intention for mankind existence can abide by all of His Commands. Yes, the inclination to disobey God is from childhood and that’s why Proverbs 22:15 talks about ‘the rod of discipline’ can drive away the folly in children as children are normally foolish (in their choices, decisions) due to the fact that their minds have not been fully developed to understand good and evil. Again, Genesis 8:21 is not about original sin and moreover, it clearly said “every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood” NOT ‘from birth’ meaning, everyone is born perfect, sinless but it’s our upbringing, the environment, the company we keep, etc, that eventually will determine whether we maintain this state of perfection or not.
No, I am not wrong but you are. When Jesus said “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11:25), he was responding to Martha who had said earlier she knew her brother will rise again at the last day, that is, the day of the Resurrection. This tell us that Jesus, in saying “I am the resurrection” was also referring to the Day of the Resurrection of the last day as he was responding to Martha’s statement. There’s not a single verse in the whole passage of John 11 that implied Martha was referring to Jesus’ 'death and resurrection’ and Jesus was responding accordingly to that. As for John 12:44-50, where did you see Jesus was saying or implying he came to die for the sins of mankind ?? Care to point that out ?? |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 02 September 2018 at 3:48am
Maybe. Then, explain how did Christians come to believe Jesus is of the same substance as God and in fact, is THE Son of God too ? |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 02 September 2018 at 4:31am
Maybe you misunderstood me. When I said ‘most Muslims are Muslim by design not personal choice', I mean they are Muslims by birth because they are born into a Muslim family. The same thing can be said of most Christians too. ‘By personal choice’ would mean that you are Muslim because you had study Islam and Christianity (and others) thoroughly and realized rationally, despite what scholars had said, God is ONLY ONE and no man can claim to be God or equate himself to God. So, it’s not about ‘fear of apostasy’, but it’s about rational thinking based on what God said in the Quran and based on what Jesus really said in the Bible and not about what other people said.
Yes, maybe so, but, here’s where you can see the cunning master plan of Satan and the subtle execution of that master plan. The main objective of Satan is to bring mankind away from God Almighty. With Christianity, Satan managed to do just that – he succeeded to bring majority of Christians to worship a man as God when they should be worshiping only God Almighty. While Satan was unsuccessful to do that with Muslims, he succeeded in drawing majority of them away from truly following the life God Almighty want mankind to live by, that is, live harmoniously and prosperously, be just, no corruptions, etc. Thus, it's not surprising today, you see a more ‘Islamic’ way of life in non-Muslim majority countries than you see in Muslim-majority countries. To quote an Egyptian jurist, Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905) – “I went to the West and saw Islam, but no Muslims; I got back to the East and saw Muslims, but not Islam”. So, what does this all tell us ? It tells us Muslims need to go back to the true teaching of the Quran on the administration of community living, human relationship, and Christians need to go back to the true teaching of Jesus in understanding who Jesus Christ really is and his relationship with God Almighty. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 02 September 2018 at 5:49am
|
Hi jp the Unitarian, Wow, that’s a pretty long response ! Anyway, lets go thru them :
The knowledge of good and evil is what God had incorporated into man (just like the 5, or 6, senses we are born with) and with that knowledge, man now can make choices when confronted with such circumstances which requires them to choose. Sin is a choice and you cannot inherit a choice. God created man in His Image, meaning, mankind is born perfect and sinless. We sin when we choose to go against God’s Command. Adam sinned because he chose to go against God’s Command not to eat from that tree. The lesson from both Genesis 2:17 and Genesis 3:22 is that if you disobeyed God’s Command, then, you will eventually be in the condemnation of hell which was referred here as ‘death’ or ‘certainly die’ in Genesis 2:17.
Well, that Adam and Eve chose ‘death’ over ‘eternal life’ would be your personal opinion as Adam never claimed so, nor did any prophet or God Almighty Himself had ever said so of Adam.
The creation of Adam and Eve was to procreate mankind as earth was created to be inhibited (Isaiah 45:18), and thus, had Adam chose to obey God, man would still sin as Adam, Eve and each of us are responsible and accountable for our own choices and decisions. Did Jesus ever speak of original sin ?? Never did. Even when referring to Adam and Eve, Jesus never mentioned about man inheriting sin from Adam (Matthew 19:4-5). Why ? Because original sin is a man-made doctrine, not from God Almighty.
Well, Mark 12:25 CLEARLY said ‘For when they rise from the dead,’ meaning the verse was talking about the last day, the Day of Resur-rection when all the dead will be resurrected – a time when we are no longer in our physical forms as we understand today but instead, we will be like angels in heaven. (Please note that ‘be like angels’ does not mean we become angels as we will still be judged for our deeds or misdeeds after the resurrection).
Well, let me repeat what I said - "and no man can redeem or die for another man’s sin as only God Almighty can forgive your sin." Hebrew 9:7, Hebrew 9:13 and Hebrew 9:14 you quoted above are NOT the words of God Almighty or even the words of Jesus Christ, so, who do you follow - God Almighty, His prophet, Jesus Christ or the words of others ?? So, let me address what Jesus really said in Mark 2:10 which you quoted – “But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” To understand that verse, you need to read that verse in its context. Firstly, the people brought the paralyzed man to Jesus for him to heal the man, NOT to ask Jesus for the forgiveness of the man’s sins. So, why did Jesus said to the paralyzed man, “Your sins are forgiven” ?? Jesus said that because the society’s belief of that time (and even to-day in some societies) was that any misfortune, illness or any other bad omens that befall on them happened because they have sinned. This is obvious as, if Jesus was really forgiving the man’s sins, then why did Jesus need to ask them which is easier to say to the para-lyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk ?” ?? Obviously, in the context of that society’s belief, it’s easier to say “your sins are forgiven” as the paralyzed man believed his paralysis was the punishment for his sins. However, we also know that with God’s Will and permission, Jesus is given the power to heal so, in the context of that society’s belief, Jesus said “But I want you to know that the son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” NOT because he was really forgiving the sins of the paralyzed man, but he wanted the man to believe that he’s no longer paralyzed because his sins have been forgiven. Today, this form of treatment is called ‘the placebo effect’ and medical practitioners today are beginning to see the effectiveness of ‘the placebo effect’ treatment. Who would have thought that 2000 years ago, Jesus was already applying the ‘placebo effect’ to heal his believers ?
Jesus saved the people of his time (or the world of his time) thru his preaching and his teaching. So, Jesus was not lying when he said those who listen to his words will be saved. It’s like a medical professor telling his students that they will be successful doctors in the future if they listen him. The professor cannot guarantee the success of all his students but he can only impart his medical knowledge to his students. Only his students can ensure their own success and that is, by listening to him. Similarly, Jesus cannot save his people as he too can only preach and teach what he heard from God Almighty. Only the people of his times can save themselves ONLY if they listen to his words.
You live thru a man by adhering to his principles, his teaching and emulating his way of life. So, how can you say you are living thru Jesus when Jesus never preached the doctrine of original sin ??
What animal sacrifices that Muslims carry out are you referring to ?? Perhaps you are referring to the sacrifices of goats/cows on Eid-Adha ??
Well, that’s the wrong interpretation of Surah Al’Imran 3:50. Where did you get that from ?? The phrase "(I have come to you), to attest the Law (the Torah) which was before me” tells us that Jesus preached the same faith as that preached earlier by Moses and the other prophets. This is evidenced by the statements of the existing gospels: According to Matthew, in his Sermon on the Mount the Messiah categorically declared: 'Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them' (Matthew 5: 17). And when a Jewish lawyer enquired: 'Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?', Jesus replied: 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great-est and the first commandment. And a second is like it, you shall love your neighbor as yourself. These two commandments formed the foundation of the law and the preaching of all the prophets. Nothing on original sin. As for “And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) for-bidden to you” simply means that Jesus would abolish the prohibitive innovations which had infiltrated the original Divine Law. These were the results of the superstitions of their ignorant commoners, the ex-tremism of their so-called righteousness. In determining what is lawful and unlawful, Jesus would be guided by the injunctions of God and not by the inventions of human beings – guess that’s why Jesus nev-er preached trinity or original sin because he was never divinely guid-ed to do so.
Again, as I always said, Hebrew 9:11-12 are NOT the words of God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus Christ. So, who do you really listen to and follow ??
There is only one resurrection and that is on the Day of Resurrection when all the dead will be brought to life to be judged. Jesus himself, when speaking of resurrection is also referring to the Day of Resur-rection. In saying he will be raised on the third day, Jesus was in fact, referring to the Old Scripture – “After two days He will revive us; on the third day He will raise us up, that we may live before Him” – Hosea 6:2. The passage of Hosea 6 was about resurrection and calling the Israelites to repent and return to God Almighty. Jesus, in referring to Hosea 6:2 was also appealing to his people to repent and return to God Almighty.
If you read Quran Al’ Nisa 4:159 carefully, you will note that it CLEARLY said “on the Day of Judgment, he (Jesus) will be a witness AGAINST them”. The key phrase here is “a witness AGAINST them’. This, in fact, is in line with what Jesus said in Matthew 7:21-23 – “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’”. In other words, Jesus was saying, firstly, on that day (Judgment Day) he will be a witness AGAINST those who called him ‘Lord’ because they worship him as God when he never claimed to be God or God the Son. Secondly, he will also be witness AGAINST those who prophesy and drive out demons in his name because he NEVER told them to do such things. Thirdly, Jesus CLEARLY said ‘only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven (will enter the kingdom of heaven)’. Certainly Jesus NEVER said only those who believe he died for their sins and rose again will enter the kingdom of heaven – these are NOT the preaching of Jesus Christ. So, listen to Jesus’ words, NOT other people’s words. By the way, Acts 17:31 are NOT the words of Jesus nor are they the words of God Almighty.
Well, if you want to quote Quran Al Imran 3:55, then, you must also believe that Jesus was not killed nor crucified but he was saved by God Almighty who raised Jesus up to Himself. You must also believe that Jesus was cleared of all falsehoods, with the Revelation of the Quran to Muhammad, by those who blasphemed against Jesus that he claimed to be God and he died for all mankind sins when there’s only one true God and only He can forgive and redeem man’s sin. As for “I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection”, it simply means those (the people of Jesus’ time) who follow their respective prophet (in this case, Jesus) are always made and seen superior to God Almighty compared to the unbelievers who reject faith. In other words, those who follow their respective prophets are better off than those who reject faith the prophet of their times. Likewise, in Moses’ times, those who follow Moses are seen and made superior than those who reject him.
Well, ‘the Book’ mentioned in Quran Surah Al Imran 3:3 and 3:7 is actually referencing to the Quran, NOT the gospel or the Bible of today. In the Quran, God revealed to Muhammad that truly it was Him who had sent the earlier Scriptures (which form the basic foundation of the Quran) – the Psalms (to David), the Torah (to Moses) and the Gospel (to Jesus). In other words, God Almighty, in the Quran, is only confirming the origins of these earlier Books or Scriptures and the authenticity of those Scriptures at that time, He was NOT confirming the authenticity of the Bible today which most Christians wrongly believed. The gospels that was canonized into the Bible today are NOT the gospel that was given to Jesus. There are many other gospels not canonized into the Bible of today. Surely, you realized that. |
Posted By: JerryMyers
Date Posted: 02 September 2018 at 6:13am
What do you mean ‘explain to God’??!! And why would you think the virgin birth of Jesus would be a waste of time to God ??
Yes, virgin birth is only applicable to Jesus and never will happen again and maybe that’s why Jesus is said to be the first and the last as he’s the first to be of virgin birth and he will be the last of such birth.
Well, I have already explained that – the virgin birth (that is, birth of a child without a male intervention) is a testimony that we are all witnesses to the Greatness of God Almighty’s Creative Power. He created Adam without a man nor a woman. He created Eve from a man (that is, without a woman). He created mankind with a man and a woman and finally He created Jesus without a man. Isn’t that a display of God’s Greatness in His Creation of man ?? Why deny God’s Greatness ??
The phrase "a virgin" which we find in the English-translated Bibles today does not appear in the original Hebrew text. The word used is 'almah’ meaning "a young woman of marriageable age". The Hebrew word for "virgin" is ‘bthuwlah’. When the Hebrew text was translated into Greek in the NT, it uses the word ‘parthenos’, which has a dual meaning; a young girl or a virgin. The translators have chosen the latter for obvious reasons. More recent and accurate versions of the Bible such as the Revised Standard Version present this verse as follows: "Therefore, the Lord Himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel"Isaiah 7:14 (RSV). So, how sure are you Isaiah 7:14 was referring to the virgin birth Jesus ?? By the way, Immanuel means ‘God is with us’. That, however, does not mean anyone who’s called ‘Immanuel’ is God because the child is called God with us. Likewise, Ishmael means ‘God hears’ but that again does not mean anyone named ‘Ishmael’ is God because the child is called God hears.
Isn’t that contradictory to Isaiah 7:14 ?? Why is the child now called ‘Jesus’ and not ‘Immanuel’ as so-prophesized in Isaiah 7:14 ?? So, how sure are you Isaiah 7:14 was referring to the virgin birth of Jesus ??
Which part of Isaiah 9:6 that imply Jesus is God ?? Was it the phrase ‘The Mighty God’ ?? The Hebrew word ‘el’ from which the phrase ‘God’ in Isaiah 9:6 was translated from, does NOT always refer to God Almighty, but can also refer to a human ruler. The English language translators capitalized the letter ‘G’ to imply Jesus is God when he is not. In fact, the Bible lexicon wrote the Hebrew word for ‘God’ in Isaiah 9:6 as just ‘el’, NOT ‘El’ - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/isaiah/9-6.htm" rel="nofollow - http://biblehub.com/lexicon/isaiah/9-6.htm A clear example that the Hebrew word “el” in Isaiah 9:6 can be used of powerful earthly rulers is Ezekiel 31:11, which was referring to the Babylonian king. If calling the Messiah ‘el’ made him God, then the Babylonian king would also be God. Or was it the phrase ‘everlasting Father’ ?? Didn’t the Bible tell us that there’s only ONE Father who is in the heaven and no one on earth should be called ‘Father’ that is, as in the same meaning as God (see Matthew 23:9) ?? Obviously, ‘everlasting Father’ for Jesus in Isaiah 9:6 could not be a reference to God who’s in the heaven. The Hebrew word for ‘Father’ is 'ab’ and in this context it is a noun; Brown Driver & Briggs Hebrew Lexicon definitions for this word are as follows: 1) The father of an individual 2) Used of God as Father of His people 3) The head or the founder of a household, a group, a family, or a clan 4) An ancestor a) A grandfather, the forefathers - of a person b) Used of people (in general) 5) An originator or patron of a class, profession, or art 6) Used of a producer, a generator (figuratively) 7) Used of benevolence and of protection (figuratively) 8) Used as a term of respect and honor 9) A ruler or a chief In the context of Isaiah 9:6, definition #9 makes more sense because it is consistent with the rest of the verse; Isaiah 9:6 seems to portray the Messiah as an authoritative ruler that has been delegated some decision making power. By combining the two nouns (everlasting, Father), and using the context of Isaiah 9:7 which reads, “…. and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever,” we see Jesus sits on David’s throne at a certain point in time, and from that point onward establishes justice forever (Peremptory Terminus). ‘…and establish with judgment and justice’ would mean Jesus laid down the basic understanding and mechanism of judgment and justice which would be the everlasting guidelines to be followed by others from that point forward. So, when you understand Isaiah 9:6 in its proper context and interpretation, there’s no indication at all that imply Jesus is God. |
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 11 September 2018 at 2:34pm
|
Well Jerry let's tackle all the inconsistencies in your response, I have to cut it into sections or else it would be too long, starting with the first section, your response is underlined
The knowledge of good and evil is
what God had incorporated into man (just like the 5, or 6, senses we
are born with) and with that knowledge, man now can make choices when
confronted with such circumstances which requires them to choose. Sin
is a choice and you cannot inherit a choice. God created man in His
Image, meaning, mankind is born perfect and sinless. We sin when we
choose to go against God’s Command. Adam sinned because he chose to
go against God’s Command not to eat from that tree.
OK we will start with the first inconsistency you say
The knowledge of good and evil is what God had incorporated into man (
the knowledge of Good and Evil was incorporated into man? Then why would Yehovah put a tree of that knowledge there to begin with? This alone makes no sense whatsoever. Even worse your own contradiction is contradicted by the Bible.
Before the knowledge of good and evil they were not ashamed of their nakedness
Gen 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, yet they were not ashamed. (TS98)
After eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they covered themselves because they were now aware and ashamed of their nakedness.
Gen 3:7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made loin coverings for themselves. (TS98)
So your whole contention falls, proven wrong by the Bible, before the fall Adam and Eve had no knowledge of their nakedness, after having eaten of the tree (the fall) they did, now they KNEW, notice how it says now "they knew" this , they did not before. So no, humans in the beginning did not have the knowledge of good and Evil. Notice they were not ashamed of what they had done, they were ashamed of being naked.. And another verse which shows your argument is nonsensical
Gen 3:22 And יהוה Elohim said, “See, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever...” (TS98)
The man BECAME like one of us says Yehovah, he was not built like that, this happened when he ate from the tree, he BECAME like Yehovah and knew Good and Evil.
2nd inconsistency
You say
you cannot inherit a choice.
First of all there is nothing said about inheriting a choice, neither do I support that, Adam and Eve were not given the ability to chose, they had it, they were given the knowledge of good and Evil, they now had the knowledge to chose and decide for themselves what is good or Evil, and not learn it from Yehovah the only perfect teacher. This is the separation from Yehovah, we do not follow his guidance of good or Evil and this leads to death, we simply cannot, because we are separated from Yehovah and cannot communicate with Yehovah for him to tell us where our decisions will lead. And yes there are examples of this in the bible look at
Matt 16:21 From that time יהושע began to show to His taught ones that it was necessary for Him to go to Yerushalayim, and to suffer much from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and to be raised again the third day. (TS98) Matt 16:22 And Kĕpha took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “Be kind to Yourself, Master, this shall not be to You!” (TS98) Matt 16:23 But He turned and said to Kĕpha, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling-block to Me, FOR YOUR THOUGHTS ARE NOT THOSE OF ELOHIM, BUT THOSE OF MEN.” (TS98)
In these we see Yeshua telling his apostles that he must go to Jerusalem to suffer and be killed and raised again the third day, Peter did not want this to happen he certainly wanted to protect his friend, to this kind deed Peter get's called Satan, why? Because he was deciding for himself what was good and what was evil, but his decision was not God's will, no Jerry it was God's will that Yeshua go to the cross to die so that he offer himself as the sacrifice for our sin and then Yehovah could resurrect him.
Yeshua could hear Yehovah and he listened, this is how he corrected the error of Adam, but in order to correct this he had to remain sinless for all his life or he would have failed and not be able to pay for this sin.
Had they (Adam and Eve) not sinned, they would have remained innocent and unaware of their nakedness, and would have followed Yehovah always, and without sin.
3rd inconsistency
God created man in His Image, meaning, mankind is born perfect and sinless.
God created man in his own image sinless, not perfect which is evident from Adam and Eve, the image of God has nothing to do with perfection. If the image of God would have been perfect then Adam and Eve would not have sinned. Man on the other hand is BORN not created like Adam, therefore in birth we inherit the same nature as our fallen father Adam, and inherit the nature of the knowledge of good and evil and death. The image of God is something else and it would require for you to have a basic understanding of the Kingdom, but since you do not and seem unwilling to learn I won't waste my time. You would first have to understand that the comforter is the spirit of truth, which is Yehovah but with a twist, but anyways.
4th inconsistency
then, you will eventually be in the condemnation of hell which was referred here as ‘death’ or ‘certainly die’
Sorry Jerry that is not what the bible says, there is no reference to going to hell whatsoever here, it says you will CERTAINLY DIE, this means it is certain you will die, what it says here is that death is certain, and this is true, you will die eventually, no matter how good you are. Don't add to the word Jerry that is instant condemnation, stick to what is said here, and that is, you will die, it ends there.
Let's see Yehovah said "if you eat of it you will certainly die", could this mean if you eat of that tree you will die, I think even a 5 year old could figure that one out. So no it is not my personal opinion and yes Yehovah did tell them that they would die, that he did not tell them that they had eternal life with the other tree, is not certain and makes absolutely no difference, he simply told them they could eat of any tree except one. It is evident then that Adam's decision was a decision between LIFE and DEATH. The fact is clear he told them they would die if they ate of that one tree, that should have been enough, for him and for you to understand. The thing is Yehovah did tell us
Gen 3:22 The LORD God said, “Since man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil, he must not reach out, take from the tree of life, eat, and live forever.” (HCSB)
Live forever, simple, eternal life with the other tree.
|
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 11 September 2018 at 2:36pm
|
The creation of Adam and Eve was to procreate mankind as earth was created to be inhibited (Isaiah 45:18), and thus, had Adam chose to obey God, man would still sin as Adam, Eve and each of us are responsible and accountable for our own choices and decisions. Did Jesus ever speak of original sin ?? Never did. Even when referring to Adam and Eve, Jesus never mentioned about man inheriting sin from Adam (Matthew 19:4-5). Why ? Because original sin is a man-made doctrine, not from God Almighty.
First notion The creation of Adam and Eve was to procreate mankind as earth was created to be inhibited (Isaiah 45:18), Adam and Eve were there and so were animals, the earth was inhabited, so what is your point. The text does not say how many just inhabited.
Adam and eve were created to procreate, well we could also say lions were made to eat meat but then the Bible says all animals were to eat green herbs in the beginning, including lions
Gen 1:29 And Elohim said, “See, I have given you every plant that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed, TO YOU IT IS FOR FOOD. (TS98) Gen 1:30 “And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the heavens, and to every creeping creature on the earth, in which there is life, EVERY GREEN PLANT IS FOR FOOD.” And it came to be so. (TS98)
So apparently you cannot compare the paradise to the fallen earth because everything changed after the fall. Lions and other predators existed in the creation yet were to eat only green plants, there is no death in paradise, and if you have immortals procreating, then soon you will have no room. Yehovah never told Adam and Eve that they would die, except by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and Evil. In the beginning Adam and Eve were like children, look at children Jerry do they have sexual impulses? No not at all, children are innocent, and Lions and other predators did not eat other animals, even if that was what they were made for, so in paradise there is no death, and adults in paradise are like children,
Matt 18:3 And he said: “Amen I say to you, unless you change and become like little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. (CPDV)
As Yeshua says if you do not become like little children, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. so there is no certainty here that they would have procreated while in the garden, it is even doubtful. The resurrection body is much like the created body both are enabled to live by Yehovah, the only difference is the created Body was formed by Yehovah directly of the earth, the resurrected body is procreated and resurrected by Yehovah.
Second problem
and thus, had Adam chose to obey God, man would still sin as Adam, Eve and each of us are responsible and accountable for our own choices and decisions.
To begin with if Adam and Eve had not sinned and obeyed Yehovah they would have remained in paradise, they were thrown out of the garden because they sinned
Gen 3:23 so יהוה Elohim sent him out of the garden of Ěḏen TO TILL THE GROUND from which he was taken, (TS98) Gen 3:24 and He drove the man out. And HE PLACED KERUḆIM AT THE EAST OF THE GARDEN OF ĚḎEN, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life. (TS98)
so it is clearly evident you cannot remain in paradise and sin. Since Adam and Eve were thrown out of paradise because they sinned. So you cannot be in paradise if you sin, and if you sin it is because you have the nature of the knowledge of good and evil. So you're whole fantasy here does not work with the logic of the Bible
Did Jesus ever speak of original sin ?? Never did. Even when referring to Adam and Eve, Jesus never mentioned about man inheriting sin from Adam (Matthew 19:4-5)
You find yourself repeating this same old contention, but the fact that Adam sinned is what causes death, but Yeshua was speaking to Jews who already knew this teaching there was no need to tell them what they already knew. This was the apostles Job, this is why they were sent out as witnesses to tell this teaching to the gentiles.
Rom 5:12 For this reason, EVEN AS THROUGH ONE MAN SIN DID ENTER INTO THE WORLD, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned – (TS98) Rom 5:13 for until the Torah, sin was in the world, but sin is not reckoned when there is no Torah. (TS98) Rom 5:14 But death reigned from Aḏam until Mosheh, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Aḏam, who is a type of Him who was to come. (TS98)
Sin entered the world by one man Adam, and death reigned up until Moses, why was death not reining after Moses? Because Yehovah had the temple built, so sacrificial animals could be offered to atone for sin.
Now if you want to try and reject Paul's words here I would advise you that Paul as well as Peter raised people from the dead and healed people, giving clear signs that they were chosen of Yehovah. They also were approved By Yeshua.
Acts 9:10 Now there was a disciple at Damascus named Ananias. The Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias.” And he said, “Here I am, Lord.” (ESV2011) Acts 9:11 And the Lord said to him, “Rise and go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man of Tarsus named Saul, for behold, he is praying, (ESV2011) Acts 9:12 and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him so that he might regain his sight.” (ESV2011) Acts 9:13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem. (ESV2011) Acts 9:14 And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on your name.” (ESV2011) Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. (ESV2011)
This is Yeshua speaking to Ananias telling him that Paul is a chosen one. If you reject Paul you also reject Yeshua and Yehovah and render yourself liable to the judgment of 4:159, because you are speaking a falsehood of Yeshua 3:55.
And also People were taking Paul's clothes and were being healed just by touching his clothes, these Jerry are CLEAR SIGNS, simple as that.
Acts 19:11 And God was accomplishing powerful and uncommon miracles by the hand of Paul, (CPDV) Acts 19:12 so much so that even when small cloths and wrappings were brought from his body to the sick, the illnesses withdrew from them and the wicked spirits departed. (CPDV) Acts 19:13 Then, even some of the traveling Jewish exorcists had attempted to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had evil spirits, saying, “I bind you by oath through Jesus, whom Paul preaches.” (CPDV)
Even the demons know Paul
Acts 19:14 And there were certain Jews, the seven sons of Sceva, leaders among the priests, who were acting in this way. (CPDV) Acts 19:15 But a wicked spirit responded by saying to them: “Jesus I know, and Paul I know. But who are you?” (CPDV)
So now getting back on track, Yehovah created the law for temple sacrifices to clear people of their sins. This is why the temple was built and that is the law of Moses .
Exod 30:10 “And Aharon shall make atonement upon its horns once a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonement – once a year he makes atonement upon it throughout your generations. It is most set-apart to יהוה.” (TS98)
Lev 1:3 ‘If his offering is a burnt offering of the herd, let him bring a male, a perfect one. Let him bring it at the door of the Tent of Meeting, for his acceptance before יהוה. (TS98) Lev 1:4 ‘And he shall lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it shall be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him. (TS98) Lev 1:5 ‘And he shall slaughter the bull before יהוה. And the sons of Aharon, the priests, shall bring the blood and sprinkle the blood all around on the altar which is at the door of the Tent of Meeting. (TS98)
the blood of animals can atone for sin but not man's, but this I have already answered, so now figure out why animals blood can clear you of sin but not a man's. Right here Jerry you have a problem man is the image and the glory of God, yet cannot ATONE FOR SIN AS AN ANIMAL CAN.
But still Yeshua was sent as the last sacrifice
Luke 24:45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, (TS98) Luke 24:46 and said to them, “THUS IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN, and so it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer and to rise again from THE DEAD the third day, (TS98) Luke 24:47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His Name to all nations, beginning at Yerushalayim. (TS98) Luke 24:48 “And you are witnesses of these [matters]. (TS98)
As it is written in verse 47 forgiveness of sin is proclaimed in his name, by the authority of his name we are cleansed of our sin, and these are Yeshua\s words. And not this according to Yeshua is in the O.T , as he says "Thus it has been written". |
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 11 September 2018 at 2:37pm
|
Well, let me repeat what I said - " Again, as I always said, Hebrew 9:11-12 are NOT the words of God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus Christ. So, who do you really listen to and follow ??
You have a tendency of rejecting what blocks you without accepting truth, that will unfortunately be your downfall. First of all, all the words in the Bible are the words of Yehovah, everything that has been included in the Bible are what Yehovah has allowed, simple as that. Hebrews 9 here is perfectly inline with the gospel, which is the word of Yehovah.
Heb 9:11 But Messiah, having become a High Priest of the coming good [matters], through the greater and more perfect Tent not made with hands, that is, not of this creation, (TS98) Heb 9:12 entered into the Most Set-apart Place once for all, not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood, having obtained everlasting redemption. (TS98) Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the defiled, sets apart for the cleansing of the flesh, (TS98) Heb 9:14 how much more shall the blood of the Messiah, who through the everlasting Spirit offered Himself unblemished to Elohim, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living Elohim? (TS98)
Lev 1:3 “If his gift is a burnt offering from the herd, he is to bring an unblemished male. He must bring it to the entrance to the tent of meeting so that he may be accepted by the LORD. (HCSB) Lev 1:4 He is to lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering so it can be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him. (HCSB) Lev 1:5 He is to slaughter the bull before the LORD; Aaron’s sons the priests are to present the blood and sprinkle it on all sides of the altar that is at the entrance to the tent of meeting. (HCSB)
Lev 4:26 He must burn all its fat on the altar, like the fat of the fellowship sacrifice. In this WAY THE PRIEST WILL MAKE ATONEMENT ON HIS BEHALF FOR THAT PERSON’S SIN, AND he will be forgiven. (HCSB)
You really need to read the Bible because you know nothing about the law of Moses
Lev 5:6 He must bring his restitution for the sin he has committed to the LORD: a female lamb or goat from the flock as a sin offering. In this way the priest will make ATONEMENT on his behalf for his sin. (HCSB)
To be forgiven of sin a blood sacrifice is to be given, it should be your own blood, but animals can be used to pay for your sin. So animals can be an atonement offering for your sin, but you say man cannot making man of less importance than an animal. Maybe you just have to figure out why animals can and men cannot, but one way or another you have a grave problem on your hands, I don't.
You seem to have a lot of problems with Yeshua being a sacrifice
Matt 16:21 From that time יהושע began to show to His taught ones that it was necessary for Him to go to Yerushalayim, and to suffer much from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and to be raised again the third day. (TS98) Matt 17:22 And while they were staying in Galil, יהושע said to them, “The Son of Aḏam is about to be delivered up into the hands of men, (TS98)
Luke 18:31 And taking the twelve aside, He said to them, “See, we are going up to Yerushalayim, and all that have been written by the prophets about the Son of Aḏam shall be accomplished. (TS98) Luke 18:32 “For He shall be delivered up to the gentiles and shall be mocked and insulted and spat upon, (TS98) Luke 18:33 and having flogged Him they shall kill Him. And on the third day He shall rise again.” (TS98)
Luke 24:45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, (TS98) Luke 24:46 and said to them, “Thus it has been written, and so it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer and to rise again from the dead the third day, (TS98) Luke 24:47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His Name to all nations, beginning at Yerushalayim. (TS98)
Repentance and forgiveness of sin should be proclaimed in his name, sounds like forgiveness of sin, ya I listen To Yeshua, how about you.
the rising of Yeshua is according to him shown in this O.T story
Matt 12:39 But He answering, said to them, “A wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Yonah. (TS98) Matt 12:40 “For as Yonah was three days and three nights in the stomach of the great fish, SO SHALL THE SON OF AḎAM BE THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE HEART OF THE EARTH. (TS98)
That is three days and three nights he was in the heart of the earth, that means buried and on the third day resurrected. |
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 11 September 2018 at 2:39pm
|
Well, if you want to quote Quran Al Imran 3:55, then, you
must also believe that Jesus was not killed nor crucified but he was saved by
God Almighty who raised Jesus up to Himself. You must also believe that Jesus
was cleared of all falsehoods, with the Revelation of the Quran to Muhammad, by
those who blasphemed against Jesus that he claimed to be God and he died for
all mankind sins when there’s only one true God and only He can forgive and
redeem man’s sin.
And again you are inventing your own fantasy, it does not say I will make those who follow you and all other prophets superior. Yehovah plainly says I WILL MAKE ALL THOSE WHO FOLLOW YOU" not other prophets but YOU, and this YOU is exclusive, it excludes all other prophets as Yeshua after resurrection also preached the gospel to the dead, so all who follow Yeshua even those who have died are elevated in Yehovah’s eyes,
1Pet 4:6 For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does. (ESV2011)
So all those who follow Yeshua are above others in accordance with the words of Yehovah in the bible and also here in the quran.
But because I accept this verse does not mean I accept your interpretation of 4:157, since it is clear that he died and was raised after three days
Matt 12:40 “For as Yonah was three days and three nights in the stomach of the great fish, so shall the Son of Aḏam be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (TS98)
Mark 8:31 And He began to teach them that the Son of Aḏam has to suffer much, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and after three days to rise again. (TS98)
Luke 24:45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, (TS98) Luke 24:46 and said to them, “THUS IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN, and so it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer and to rise again from the dead the third day, (TS98) Luke 24:47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His Name to all nations, beginning at Yerushalayim. (TS98)
In Yeshua’s own words this was all written in the O.T that the messiah must suffer and BE KILLED and spend three days and THREE nights in the heart of the earth, and then RISE AGAIN FROM THE DEAD THE THIRD DAY and these are Yeshua’s words please don’t even try to do your little fantasy here, I believe the words are clear enough.
by those who blasphemed against Jesus that he claimed to be God and he died for all mankind sins when there’s only one true God and only He can forgive and redeem man’s sin.
Well you've got the wrong guy, I don't say he is God and this verse makes no reference to a specific falsehood, but Falsehoods LIKE DENYING HIS RESURRECTION, and only god can forgive sins is only part of the teaching, and you do not understand how Yeshua saved us. God cannot redeem sins, he can forgive sins but cannot just forgive them, if such were the case then we would have no need for the bible or quran, do whatever you like and everything is a ok. If Yehovah could just forgive your sin, then we are forgiven and that is all. But this is not the case the cost of sin is very expensive, and we cannot pay for all have sinned. So yes Yehovah can forgive sin but this forgiveness comes at a price and it must be payed to Yehovah for him to redeem us and this price is BLOOD, perfect sinless BLOOD.
Definition of redeemredeemed; redeeming; redeems https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transitive" rel="nofollow - 1 a : to buy back : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/repurchase" rel="nofollow - b : to get or win back 2 : to free from what https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/distress#h2" rel="nofollow - distresses or harms: such as a : to free from captivity by payment of https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ransom#h1" rel="nofollow - ransom b : to https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/extricate" rel="nofollow - extricate from or help to overcome something https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/detrimental#h1" rel="nofollow - detrimental c : to release from blame or debt : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clear" rel="nofollow - clear d : to free from the https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consequence" rel="nofollow - consequences of sin 3 : to change for the better : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reform" rel="nofollow - reform 4 : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/repair" rel="nofollow - repair , https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/restore" rel="nofollow - restore 5 a : to free from a https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lien" rel="nofollow - lien by payment of an amount secured https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thereby" rel="nofollow - thereby b (1) : to remove the obligation of by payment the U.S. Treasury redeems savings bonds on demand (2) : to exchange for something of value redeem trading stamps c : to make good : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fulfill" rel="nofollow - fulfill
redeem means to buy back or to purchase and the payment for sin is BLOOD and God cannot bleed, but anyways like i said you refuse to understand and refuse all the bible that shows how Yehovah made all this possible, but whatever i know i’m wasting my time with you. |
Posted By: jp the unitarian
Date Posted: 11 September 2018 at 2:40pm
|
If you read Quran Al’ Nisa 4:159 carefully, you will note that it CLEARLY said “on the Day of Judgment, he (Jesus) will be a witness AGAINST them”. The key phrase here is “a witness AGAINST them’. This, in fact, is in line with what Jesus said in Matthew 7:21-23 – “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’”. In other words, Jesus was saying, firstly, on that day (Judgment Day) he will be a witness AGAINST those who called him ‘Lord’ because they worship him as God when he never claimed to be God or God the Son. Secondly, he will also be witness AGAINST those who prophesy and drive out demons in his name because he NEVER told them to do such things. Thirdly, Jesus CLEARLY said ‘only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven (will enter the kingdom of heaven)’. Certainly Jesus NEVER said only those who believe he died for their sins and rose again will enter the kingdom of heaven – these are NOT the preaching of Jesus Christ. So, listen to Jesus’ words, NOT other people’s words. By the way, Acts 17:31 are NOT the words of Jesus nor are they the words of God Almighty.
. By the way, Acts 17:31 are NOT the words of Jesus nor are they the words of God Almighty.
Like I have already said and will repeat, Paul was sent by Yeshua to announce the good news
Acts 9:3 Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. (ESV2011) Acts 9:4 And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” (ESV2011) Acts 9:5 And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. (ESV2011) Acts 9:6 But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” (ESV2011) Acts 9:7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. (ESV2011)
Yeshua went to Paul and told him to enter the city to be told what he was going to do.
Acts 9:10 Now there was a disciple at Damascus named Ananias. The Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias.” And he said, “Here I am, Lord.” (ESV2011) Acts 9:11 And the Lord said to him, “Rise and go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man of Tarsus named Saul, for behold, he is praying, (ESV2011) Acts 9:12 and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him so that he might regain his sight.” (ESV2011) Acts 9:13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem. (ESV2011) Acts 9:14 And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on your name.” (ESV2011) Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for HE IS A CHOSEN INSTRUMENT OF MINE to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. (ESV2011) Acts 19:11 And God was doing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, (ESV2011) Acts 19:12 so that even handkerchiefs or aprons that had touched his skin were carried away to the sick, and their diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them. (ESV2011)
Ananias did not like Paul who was a persecutor of the church but Yeshua told him he was a chosen one of his to announce the good news in his name, so yes Paul is absolutely valid.
Also Paul was so enabled by the holy spirit that just touching his clothes healed. And Paul is witnessed to by Peter
2Pet 3:15 and reckon the patience of our Master as deliverance, as also our beloved brother Sha’ul wrote to you, ACCORDING TO THE WISDOM GIVEN TO HIM, (TS98) 2Pet 3:16 as also in all [his] letters, speaking in them concerning these [matters], in which some are hard to understand, which those who are untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the other Scriptures. (TS98)
Here is a story of a man healing in the name of Yeshua Paul proclaimed, not how you are supposed to do it, and this cause them a problem
Acts 19:15 But the evil spirit answered them, “Jesus I know, and Paul I recognize, but who are you?” (ESV2011) Acts 19:16 And the man in whom was the evil spirit leaped on them, mastered all of them and overpowered them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. (ESV2011)
What must be notice here is that even the demons recognize the authority of Paul
Acts 17:31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” (ESV2011)
So he Yeshua will be a witness against all those who speak falsehoods about him, Like saying he is God and denying the cross and saying he was anything else but our human brother. There are many falsehoods spoken of Yeshua and that unfortunately is most religions today.
Secondly, he will also be witness AGAINST those who prophesy and drive out demons in his name because he NEVER told them to do such things.
Matt 10:6 but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Yisra’ĕl. (TS98) Matt 10:7 “And as you go, proclaim, saying, ‘The reign of the heavens has drawn near.’ (TS98) Matt 10:8 “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons. You have received without paying, give without being paid. (TS98)
Luke 9:49 And Yoh�£anan answering, said, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your Name, and we forbade him because he does not follow with us.” (TS98) Luke 9:50 But יהושע said to him, “Do not forbid him, for he who is not against us is for us.” (TS98)
Mark 16:15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the Good News to every creature. (TS98) Mark 16:16 “He who has believed and has been immersed, shall be saved, but he who has not believed shall be condemned. (TS98) Mark 16:17 “And these signs shall accompany the ones who believe: In My Name they shall cast out demons, they shall speak with renewed tongues, (TS98) Mark 16:18 they shall take up snakes, and if they drink any deadly [drink] it shall by no means hurt them, they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall get well.” (TS98) Mark 16:19 Then indeed, after the Master had spoken to them, He was received up into the heaven, and sat down at the right hand of Elohim. (TS98) Mark 16:20 And they went out and proclaimed it everywhere, while the Master worked with them, and confirmed the word through the accompanying signs. Amĕn. (TS98)
All Yeshua’s words, yes he did tell them to go out and heal, so you’re whole contention here is false. Now look at verse 16:16 you have to be baptized to be saved, hmm are you baptized if not you are still under the law of moses, did you bring oyur animal sacrifice to atone for your sin rae Leviticus and see that that is your salvation not Yeshua.
|
Posted By: Peace maker
Date Posted: 15 September 2018 at 7:41pm
|
To JerryMeyers. "Why wasn't Jesus named Immanuel?" There are many names
given to Jesus using the phrase “He shall be called,” both in the Old and New
Testaments. This was a common way of saying that people would refer to Him in
these various ways. Isaiah prophesied of the Messiah, “His name shall be called
Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of
Peace” (Isaiah 9:6). None of these titles was Jesus’ actual name, but these
were descriptions people would use to refer to Him forever. Luke tells us Jesus
“shall be called the Son of the Highest” (Luke 1:32) and “son of God” (1:35),
but neither of these was His name. In two different
places, the prophet Jeremiah says in referring to the coming Messiah, “And this
is His name by which He shall be called, YHWH, OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS” (Jeremiah
23:5-6; 33:15-16). Now we know that God, the Father, is named Yahweh. Jesus was
never actually called Yahweh as though it was His name, but His role was that
of bringing the righteousness of Yahweh to those who would believe in Him,
exchanging that righteousness for our sin (2 Corinthians 5:21). Therefore, this
is one of the many titles or “names” which belong to Him. In the same way, to
say that Jesus would be called "Immanuel" means Jesus is God and that
He dwelt among us in His incarnation and that He is always with us. Jesus was
God in the flesh. Jesus was God making His dwelling among us (John 1:1,14). No,
Jesus' name was not Immanuel, but Jesus was the meaning of Immanuel, "God
with us." Immanuel is one of the many titles for Jesus, a description of
who He is. |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 30 September 2018 at 3:05pm
You ask me to explain
how did Christians believe Jesus is of the same substance as God and in fact,
is THE Son of God too ? Firstly human beings are the only part of the creation
made in God's image. There is nothing else in the creation that has Almighty
Gods divine pattern and blessing apart from us as humans. So in a sense we all
have an aspect of the divine within us. Consider the sun as an analogy. The sun radiates heat and light. Heat and light are not the sun but are of the sun. Jesus Christ was God's radiant eminence that became flesh. Son means “heir”. It does not mean God literally had a physical “son” as an offspring , but by heir it means He Inherited all of creation as a gift, and believers are co-heirs with Him. It makes far more sense that God would reveal Himself through a human than in some kind of “recitation” that is supposed to be a copy of “golden tablets in heaven”. I disagree that most
Christians are Christian because they are born into Christian families rather than
rational thinking. This is the case for Muslims however. Christians are far
better educated than Muslims and because Christianity developed and currently
exists in a highly educated free thinking and free speaking Western modern
society they are far more likely than Muslims to make decisions based on
rational thought. The same cannot be said of Muslims. Islam is still
constrained by Medieval thought where free thought and speech is not encouraged
due to fears of blasphemy and apostasy. Just face it. Any
Muslim who was to take an unbiased reading of the Bible, who comes to see Jesus
as the Messiah who was prophesied, who come into spiritual “sonship” to The One
Most High God through the Son and be liberated from dead Islamic
religious laws, would be persecuted or executed for apostasy. It’s a fact ! Why
is Islam so insecure? What are Muslims afraid of ? Oh the cunning master
plan of Satan ! Of course, how convenient. So rather than Muslims taking
personal responsibility for their own failings and for the failings of Islam
you come up with some convenient rationalisation. This is why Islam is such a
mess because Muslims fail to take responsibility for their own failings. Are
Christians also under some Cunning master plan of Satan? As explained above.
Christians do not worship a man as God but rather a The Son of God. Why is there more of
a blessing on Western nations rather than Muslim nations? Because of the
stability and prosperity that Western nations have inherited from their
Christian heritage and secular administration. Muslims will never go back to
“true teaching of the Quran” or the administration of community and human
relationships. They never have and they never will. Islam under Mohamad was a
failure. It was simply a time of war and slavery. Nothing special about it. The so called Muslim “Golden Age” under the “four rightly guided caliphs” was not a time of true teaching. Three of the four caliphs were murdered and it was a time of Islamic civil war. No “paradise” there. Let me ask you who has tried to return to the true teachings and community lately ? Oh yes , that’s right, ISIS. And why will Islam never find the “true Islamic way”. Because human nature is such that externally imposed religious laws will ever be enough. |