I wrote this in January 2004 I don't know what for than forgotten.---

36  Then cometh Jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unto the disciples, Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder.
37  And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy.
38  Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
39  And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
40  And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour?
41  Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.
42  He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying,
O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done.
43  And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy.
44  And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words.
45  Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.
46  Rise, let us be going: behold, he is at hand that doth betray me.
47  And while he yet spake, lo, Judas, one of the twelve, came, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and elders of the people.
--------------

And when you are among them and keep up the prayer for them, let a party of them stand up with you, and let them take their arms; then when they have prostrated themselves let them go to your rear, and let another party who have not prayed come forward and pray with you, and let them take their precautions and their arms; (for) those who disbelieve desire that you may be careless of your arms and your luggage, so that they may then turn upon you with a sudden united attack, and there is no blame on you, if you are annoyed with rain or if you are sick, that you lay down your arms, and take your precautions; surely Allah has prepared a disgraceful chastisement for the unbelievers. (4:102.)

Then when you have finished the prayer, remember Allah standing and sitting and reclining; but when you are secure (from danger) keep up prayer; surely prayer is a timed ordinance for the believers (4:103.)

Absolutely brilliant comparison, superme.  You are the first one who has brought this up. I have never read anything like this comparison that you made. God bless.

If the followers (multitudes?) and the disciples had watched and guarded him instead of sleeping, Jesus would not have suffered the misery.

And the followers of Muhammad guarded him so well that he completed his mission entrusted to him by God Almighty.

No wonder, God Almighty finally chose the Arabs for receiving the last Messenger.

Best Regards & Salaam Alaikum

BMZ

Alibaba wrote: bmzp, don't you know that Jesus said that the Son of Man came to give His life a ransom for many?  Of course He was arrested - this was according to God's will, and nothing happens apart from God's will, does it?

Well according to Fred on another thread it does. In fact, he said that none of this was meant to be.

Interesting Christian take on things, don't you think?

oh dear, this is the worst yet, i have to say.  the muslim perception on this thread at least seems to run like this - "poor little prophet jesus was so badly let down by those weak disciples of his and got killed as a result, or rather didnt get killed as a result.  but prophet muhammad was so well protected by those big brave arabs that no harm ever came to him"  -----

but enough of this, let us examine a couple of scriptural facts.  luke 4: 28-30 tells us of an incident when the Lord Jesus was threatened by an angry mob, who were about to throw him down a hill - but he passed through them and went on his way unharmed - he needed noone to guard him.  look also at john 7: 32,45,46, when the chief priests and pharisees sent officers to arrest him,  but they went back without even having attempted to arrest him, such was the authority of his Person and speech.  even when they actually did arrest him, (because he allowed them to) in john 18: 6, we read that the motley crew assembled to take him with all their weapons, "went backward, and fell to the ground" at the majesty of his presence.  Christ needed no bodyguard, like some tuppenny-bit politician.  nor can i think of any prophet or apostle of God who had this sort of protection

I think that the most important point here is that it has been argued on this board that Jesus made it clear to the disciples that he was in fact God. If that is the case, then even with the sure knowledge that they were in the presence of God Himself, and that God, in human form was about to end His time with them on this earth, they slept and did not even keep watch with God on the last night.

Just ask yourself this question, if you knew you were in the presence of God the Almighty, and God told you it was His last night on earth, would you sleep? C,mon, this is God. They couldn't even stay awake for God?

Then, in the morning, they denied knowing Jesus, who has made it clear to them that he is God, the Almighty. Then Peter, whom God had treated as a brother, disowned him three times. 

All of this would be bad enough if it had happened to a regular man, much less a Prophet of God. But, according to Christians, it happened to God.  

Who among us would waste the chance to sit in the actual presence of God for a second of time? Yet, the disciples, those men handpicked by Jesus himself, slept their last night in the presence of God. Even after Jesus, God to them, awoke them the first time and asked them: "Could you men not keep watch with me for one hour?" they fell asleep a second time. Then denied him the next day. The man that you say they knew was God, because he made it clear to them.

Fred: "in john 18: 6, we read that the motley crew assembled to take him with all their weapons, "went backward, and fell to the ground" at the majesty of his presence.  Christ needed no bodyguard, like some tuppenny-bit politician."

Yet, in Luke Jesus told his disciples to sell their clothes to buy swords, and in Matthew one of the disciples actually used his sword to cut off the ear of one of those sent to arrest Jesus. If he was in need of no protection, why tell the disciples to arm themselves?  

Luke 22:35 Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"   "Nothing," they answered.

Luke 22:36 He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.

Luke 22:37 It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'^[b]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment."

Luke 22:38 The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied.

Matthew 26:50 Jesus replied, "Friend, do what you came for."^[d]    Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him.

Matthew 26:51 With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.

The fact that the disciples fell asleep is the perfect examples of their "human failings", and the fact that we ALL are imperfect.  This took place on the night before the Crucifixion.  Below is the teaching from the Gospel of Matthew:

Matthew 26:31-35

I guess imperfection would be one explanation. But I still don't get it. These men were in the presence of the man that they believed to be God. They had given up everything to follow him and spread his word. Supposedly they were willing to die for him, yet they couldn't stay awake for God on his last night on earth?

It was God's last night with them in the flesh. They would never see him again on this earth. God. And all that God asked of them was to keep watch with him, not once, but twice. Yet, they couldn't do it.

Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son for God. Moses faced down Pharoah, led the Israelis from bondage, and wandered the desert for 40 years for God. John the Baptist got himself beheaded for God.

But these 11 men, who ate with, slept with, and actually touched God in human form, couldn't stay awake with him?

Something must be missing here.

"Something must be missing here."

sure. sleep was missing.  when you are exhausted you go to sleep.  and most of them did go on to lay down their lives for the Lord in the following years

the other thing that was missing was the muslim propensity for fighting and killing.  muhammad informs muslims in the quran that fighting is "prescribed for them".  only peter gave into this weakness at the arrest of Christ when he cut off malchus' ear, which the Lord then healed

fredifreeloader wrote: "Something must be missing here." sure. sleep was missing.  when you are exhausted you go to sleep.  and most of them did go on to lay down their lives for the Lord in the following years the other thing that was missing was the muslim propensity for fighting and killing.  muhammad informs muslims in the quran that fighting is "prescribed for them".  only peter gave into this weakness at the arrest of Christ when he cut off malchus' ear, which the Lord then healed

I would venture to say that either:

God is a very bad judge of character, which can never be the case.

They had never been told that Jesus was God Almighty, so they were not failing God but a man.

They were told Jesus was God, but did not believe it. Once again, not failing God Almighty, but a man.

Muslim propensity to violence, indeed.

Was it not the Joshua who slayed everything living thing and set fire to the houses and livestock? Was it not Samson who smite a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass? And so on and so on...

Didn't Jesus, the Prince of Peace, say:

Matthew 10:34 "Don't imagine that I came to bring peace to the earth! No, I came to bring a sword.

Luke 12:49 "I have come to bring fire to the earth, and I wish that my task were already completed!

12:51 Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I have come to bring strife and division!

(Fredi) �the other thing that was missing was the muslim propensity for fighting and killing.�

Is it a �Muslim� or a �Davidic� propensity, one wonders?  Perhaps an honorable mention should in this case also be sent to King David, the prototype of the expected �Messiah,� who, according to the Biblical record, was apparently not content merely to have slain the Philistines but decided, as something in the nature of a coup-de-gras, to mutilate their genitals as well (1 Samuel 18:25-27).   

Here is Moses Maimonides on what to watch for in the upcoming �Messiah:�

�And if a king shall stand up from among the House of David, studying Torah and indulging in commandments like his father David, according to the written and oral Torah, and he will coerce all Israel to follow it and to strengthen its weak points, and will fight Hashem's [God's] wars, this one is to be treated as if he were the anointed one ...�

Ok, Maimonides.  What are Hashem�s [God�s] wars?  That sounds rather like a jihad to me!  And so, by the sounds of things, does the conclusion of that �Left Behind� series by Tim LaHaye.

So let us be unabashedly and Biblically martial by concluding with a select reading from what Jerry Falwell, in his fatwa for World Net Daily (cited below), calls the �Song of Victory� in Exodus 15: "� The Lord is a man of war: the Lord is his name."

Serv

Ref:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Messiah

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36859

mish said ----"I would venture to say that either:

God is a very bad judge of character, which can never be the case.

They had never been told that Jesus was God Almighty, so they were not failing God but a man.

They were told Jesus was God, but did not believe it. Once again, not failing God Almighty, but a man."

mish, have you never read the Word of God? - see 1 corinthians 1: 27-30 - "But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise: and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty: and the base things of the world, and the things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and the things which are not, to bring to nought the things that are: that no flesh should glory in his presence"

ok servetus, let me rephrase it - another thing that was missing was the muslim/old testament propensity for fighting and killing.   Gods nature has not changed, as you rightly point out "the Lord is a man of war", but his dealings with men have, as they did in the past.  see the covenant with noah, which introduced capital punishment, the covenant with abraham, which brought in circumcision, and the covenant with the children of israel mediated by moses, which revealed the law.

now there is no point in quoting moses maimonides to me.  it is a name ive heard of, (some old jewish guy in the distant past) and ive other things to pursue rather than find out about him.  also ive never had the pleasure or otherwise of reading the oeuvres of mr tim lahaye, but i would venture a guess that he writes about a future age, ie not the present age of grace.  jerry falwell i know nothing about

Ok, Fredi, you have again proven (to me) that you are both a good sport and sportive.  Though your statement set me off and thus I quoted you, most of my post wasn�t really to you, anyway.  Truth be told, until you tossed out that (what sounded like a) jibe at Islam, I was going to tell you that your one post, the one which began �oh dear� was, for the most part, and especially for its length, great (with a good selection of scriptures)!

Not only the content but also the essence of that initial post (of yours) reminded me of when I once, long ago, went to church with a Methodist girlfriend.  In that service, there was a soprano soloist who sang a song (I could probably find it by Googling), the lyrics of which I recall to this day, and, in the singing, she gave me goose bumps (in a good sense).  It went something like this (reference is to Jesus):

�He could have called ten thousand angels

To destroy the world and to set him free

He could have called ten thousand angels

But he died alone for you and me.�

Now you might see why your post reminded me of that?

Best regards,

Serv

"have you never read the Word of God?"

Which Word of God? Isn't Corinthians the word of Paul in letters he sent to the Church of Corinth?

I have read these Words of God:

2:118 Say those without knowledge: "Why speaketh not Allah unto us? or why cometh not unto us a Sign?" So said the people before them words of similar import. Their hearts are alike. We have indeed made clear the signs unto any people who hold firmly to Faith (in their hearts).

2:213 Mankind was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace Guided the believers to the Truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guided whom He will to a path that is straight.

2:242 Thus doth Allah Make clear His signs to you: In order that ye may understand.

God has sent CLEAR SIGNS. God doesn't want us to be confused or to have to guess. God wants us to follow His laws and choose right from wrong. God is a loving God and would not play word games with our immortal souls.

God sent clear signs up until the New Testament. Then somehow things became very mysterious and unclear. Jesus is God but would not CLEARLY state it. There is a Trinity, but it is only hinted at. God is not the One God, but part of a Godhead.

Show me any proof, any proof that Jesus stood up and said "I AM GOD". Not, who do you believe me to be, or I am who you think I am....  Just a simple: "I AM GOD". Show me any proof that the Trinity or Godhead exists in the Bible before the Council of Nicea. Exists as in it is written that God is a Trinity or part of a Godhead, not that it is some obscure passage that hints at such.

Yes, we have to have faith. But faith in the existence of God at all. Once we believe that, then the rest is very easy, Or should be.

Oh yes.  I forgot to mention, and not meaning to be overly skeptical, that, in retrospect, the fact that I got goose bumps at the Methodist church from that soloist doesn�t necessarily mean anything because I also got them from listening to a fine recording of Leontyne Price singing O Patria Mia from Verdi�s Aida and, beyond the basics, I didn�t even know what the lyrics meant.

Anyway, that's a bit off topic but I thought I should clarify.

Serv

Serv:

I get goosebumps from French pastry. Does that count?

(Fredi)  �also ive never had the pleasure or otherwise of reading the oeuvres of mr tim lahaye, but i would venture a guess that he writes about a future age, ie not the present age of grace. 

I don�t read much fiction and have only read about Tim LaHaye's �Left Behind� series and thus I cannot say for sure if it is a pleasure or otherwise from my standpoint.  I think the series deals more with the proposed and imminent culmination of the age by way of a highly materialistic reading of the last book of the New Testament, the Apocalypse, or Revelations [note the �s�]  .   One thing about it, as this (below linked) unflattering op/ed piece, �Jesus and Jihad,� by Nicholas Kristof for the New York Times points out, there seems to be a lot of at best repressed or deferred old-fashioned militancy in the work.

(Mishmish)  �I get goosebumps from French pastry. Does that count?�

Technically, to remain consistent with my standardized inquiry into goosebumps, it really only counts if �French Pastry� is a soprano who can sustain a high (octave) C.  

Serv

Ref:

  http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/17/opinion/17KRIS.html?ex=1247803200&en=b9eee1a2743a902b&ei=5090 - http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/17/opinion/17KRIS.html?ex=124 7803200&en=b9eee1a2743a902b&ei=5090

Serv: "Technically, to remain consistent with my standardized inquiry into goosebumps, it really only counts if �French Pastry� is a soprano who can sustain a high (octave) C"

Well, it's singing my name....

Bismarck wrote: This is NOT true. An analysis of the Gethsemene scenes from Matthew, Luke, and John clearly shows that Christians are mandated to KEEP & BEAR ARMS -- AT THE READY (ON THEIR PERSONS AT ALL TIMES). The Messiah only ordered his men to stand down so that the crucifiction could happen. But the Messiah did NOT tell Simon the Stone (Kephas, Petros) to DESTROY his sword, only to put it in its proper place -- IN HIS SHEATH, AT HIS SIDE. The Apostles were confused, they thought they were supposed to defend their Lord unto the maximum sacrifice if necessary -- he told them to stand down, but NOT TO LET DOWN THEIR GUARD. Christians are mandated to KEEP & BEAR ARMS AT THE READY -- but constrain their USE to those times, and only those times, when the Scriptures demand their use. Christianity is NOT a "pacificist" (so-called) religion. Their is a place for (JUST) war in Christianity.

yeah right bismarck, two swords between the lot of them, right?  arent we just s t r e t c h i n g things a little here? 

let me just also say - there is no place for any literal war in christianity, as is clear in the holy scriptures.  the christians arsenal, and the nature of his war, are clearly delineated in ephesians 6: 10-18.  this is not to say that christians, as citizens of their country, may not fight in a just war, in defence of their country, but that, of course, is a seperate issue

no i dont know the song you quoted, servetus, but it certainly fits my thoughts in relation to gethsemane and the crucifixion

i would have called them "goose-pimples", actually!

as for nicholas kristofs article, i dont know why  its called "jesus and jihad".  the scenario presented does not seem to include any christian army, for instance.  i do not know of any christian army in the bible, in this age, or in the future.  it describes the return of Christ to earth, and the destruction of his enemies.  why this should come into the category of "religious intolerance" i dont know.  it is direct divine intervention in the world, nothing to do with human relations.  the writer strikes me as being of that ilk, that just cannot believe that anybody believes the bible any more.  he ought to get out more.

but i dont think ill be reading any of tim lahayes books, they sound too florid, among other things 

Well, Fredi, I meant to mention as a �reader beware� that the op/ed piece came from the New York Times, after all.  That said, with that caveat aside, it is not so difficult for me, an amateur reader of history, to envisage a less than celestial (read military, or �Church Militant�) means by which, in future, every knee could be somehow made to bow and every tongue somehow made to confess and all that.  Speaking of florid, I had best reign in my imagination at this point, lest I try my hand at writing the world�s worst American novel (a sort of Torquemada as Robert Mapplethorpe at Abu Ghraib, if you get my drift).

But still, truth be told, I hear, understand and appreciate your perspective on this.  I thought, in turn, that you could appreciate the song.

Serv