I have awarded a part of my contract work to a  Japanese company.

As the three Japanese engineers entered my office, they worshipped me by bowing three times and then we shook hands before getting down to business.

I didn't realise that I had been worshipped by them. While they were worshipping me, I kept quiet. They must have thought that I allowed myself to be worshipped.

Strange!

BMZ

 That was class, Fredi.  Now I know my worth.

BR

BMZ

Interesting .

bmzsp, now I must ask if I should move it to Humour section.

Peace

peacemaker,

Assalaam Alaikum,

My pleasure. Yes, please. You can move it to the Humour Section but will you allow this to be here for 3-4 hours, till Serv, George, Mishmish and other friends have read and enjoyed this?  

Best Regards

BMZ

Assalamu Alaikum!

bmzsp,

"My pleasure. Yes, please. You can move it to the Humour Section but will you allow this to be here for 3-4 hours, till Serv, George, Mishmish and other friends have read and enjoyed this?  "

Request granted. Well, I can give you whole day. Have a nice day.

Peace

Wa Alaikum Assalaam, peacemaker

Thanks a lot indeed.

"In-na fee zaa-lika la-ibratal lay-oolil-absaar." meaning "There is a lesson in this for those who can see."

BR

BMZ

Assalamu Alaikum!

Brother bmzsp ( please correct me if am incorrect about your gender ):

You are welcome.

"In-na fee zaa-lika la-ibratal lay-oolil-absaar." meaning "There is a lesson in this for those who can see."

I agree with you. That reminded me a verse in Qur'an.

041.053
YUSUFALI: Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?

Dear BMZ,

 !   Cheers, or thanks for sharing your characteristically funny and remarkably insightful journal entry �what I, BMZ, did today,� or �what happened to me, BMZ, today.�  Please do give us more journal entries as things unfold.

By the way, speaking of lessons, whether in English or otherwise, you weren�t, by any chance, and at least in the back of your mind (that part which was not involved with the practical business affairs of �this world�), too heavily engrossed in contemplating such Biblical verses as, for example, Matthew 9:18, were you?  If only in a feeble-minded attempt to pass my A-levels, and to get out of our school with its unrelenting and reprimanding headmaster (the one who calls us both no-tee, or naughty), I have already done the grunt work, here�s the proof:  http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/4/1147183015-6536.html - http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/4/1147183015-65 36.html

Now let me just say, in closing, that if I am close and if something like this was going on in the back of your mind, then allow me to play Festus to your St. Paul (though granted you do not make yourself a saint, or at least you have the good sense to wear your halo askew) and paraphrase:  BMZ, �thou art beside thyself; [too little] learning doth make thee mad.�

Best regards,

Serv

peacemaker,

Wa Alaikum Assalaam,

Yes, a brother. Please address me as BMZ. I could not register with three letters so I added SP for Singapore.

That is a beautiful verse. My advice to all Muslims is to read and read Qur'aan till beautiful meanings start dawning.

BR

BMZ

Dear Serv,

You are right and you surprised me when you read my mind.  It's true that I was reading all the reported versions of people worshipping Jesus. 

What struck me was the argument,"They worshipped him and he let them worship him and kept quiet and never stopped them from worshipping him." That is the proof that Jesus wanted to be worshipped.

It also comes into my mind that Jesus might have thought, "Look at them! I have been telling them to worship only the Lord their God with all their hearts, minds and souls and now they are worshipping me" and that was possibly the reason that he kept quiet instead of calling them brood of vipers.

You gave me the grunt work at  http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/4/1147183015-65 36.html - http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/4/1147183015-65 36.html

just now and believe me I had to sca many pages of the Holy NT with my feeble eyes.  Thanks for the link.

I enjoyed this from you: " BMZ, �thou art beside thyself; [too little] learning doth make thee mad.� "

Best Regards

BMZ

I understand, BMZ, at least up to a point, and that is why I think that your journal entry is both funny and insightful.  By the way, I should have provided the reference.  This is the dialogue between Festus and St. Paul to which I alluded above:

�And as [Paul] thus spake for himself, Festus said with a loud voice, Paul, thou art beside thyself; much learning doth make thee mad.  But he said, I am not mad, most noble Festus; but speak forth the words of truth and soberness. (Acts 26:24-25, KJV)�

Persevere and carry on �

Best regards, 

Serv

Serv,

Paul and I can never get along.  He talks too much. He spoke so much that he overtook the Master and hijacked his Master's religion. In fact, he spoke what even his Master never said or taught. I dislike him. That is one man I cannot read but then the NT is mostly Paul. Hope George is not reading my post. 

Best Regards & Good Night from Singapore

BMZ

Assalamu Alaikum:

An interesting true note on this very subject: about 5 weeks ago a young man in Morocco was charged with shirk for running onto a soccer field and "worshipping" one of the players while screamimg "I'm not worthy". 

What I find truly ironic is that Moroccan citizens are expected to do sujjud and kiss the hand of the King.

Salaams

Yes I believe to that the japanese men weren't worshipping you, bmz

It is a custom of theirs to bow when greeting  

Paul and I can never get along.  He talks too much. He spoke so much that he overtook the Master and hijacked his Master's religion. In fact, he spoke what even his Master never said or taught. I dislike him. That is one man I cannot read but then the NT is mostly Paul. Hope George is not reading my post. 

Best Regards & Good Night from Singapore

BMZ

LOL!

*** unedifying post, self-deleted ****

Mishmish,

Assalamo Alaikum,

From you: "An interesting true note on this very subject: about 5 weeks ago a young man in Morocco was charged with shirk for running onto a soccer field and "worshipping" one of the players while screamimg "I'm not worthy"."

Upon checking with the Moroccan Authorities, it was revealed to me that person was a foreigner and his name was Fredi.  

Here we have to remember that the people in various Shaikhdoms, Kingdoms, Emirates and Sultanates of the Midddle East are still "worshipping" their Shaikhs, Kings, Emirs and Sultans. The higher-ranking even rub their noses onto the noses of their rulers and kiss their cheeks. It's "over-worshipping".

BR

BMZ

Dear Danty,

Thanks. I have been working with the Japanese for about twenty-five years and I need a good rest specially on the day when I am with them.

Receiving their worship of me is joyful indeed but after "worshipping" them in return, my back gets sore. The mutual worshipping can go on and on for long sometimes, you know.

When  I had my first encounter with a Japanese Engineer who started  addressing me as "My good Pharoah", I didn't quite like that. I bore with that for a while and asked him if he had known who the Pharoah was and if he had read the Bible. He was flabbergasted when I told him Pharoah was not a good man. He treated the Jews very badly.

I then found out that he was calling me, "My good fellow".

BR

BMZ

"Upon checking with the Moroccan Authorities, it was revealed to me that person was a foreigner and his name was Fredi.  "

Mishmish,

From you:

"    "

Good sense of humour!  and I hope Fredi does not lose his good sense of humour and retains it cheerfully.

Salaam Alaikum

BMZ

To all,

I find it very disturbing that the Moderators of this site would allow the religion of Christianity to be insulted in this way.  From what I have read on this site, the Moderators have come to the defense of a certain participant's faith when it was insulted.

I would expect the same courtesy shown for Orthodox Christians.

I am very disappointed.

George, don't allow those words to be cause for concern.  There are much more important issues at hand.  We both know "what Jesus would do" in this situation.  So that is not the question.  The question is "what will you do in this situation"?

I like to remember these kind words from Blessed Mother Theresa:

"There is only one God and He is God to all; therefore it is important that everyone is seen as equal before God. I�ve always said we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a better Catholic. We believe our work should be our example to people. We have among us 475 souls - 30 families are Catholics and the rest are all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs�all different religions. But they all come to our prayers."

All God's Peace and Blessings,

Patty

George,

If, by any chance, the quote by Nietzsche is compounding your concern, I suggest that you avoid the rigors of Tubingen (which I�ve only seen from a distance) because he is often discussed in that town, known for its insistence upon free speech, �higher literary (Biblical) criticism� and the dissection of even the most difficult, or contrary ideas.  But still, from such a place as this a Hans Kung and a Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) emerge, relatively fit for the fight. 

Howdy Servie,

I honestly believe George is "up to the fight", so to speak.  It's the lack of reciprocation where respect is concerned that has upset him. Certainly not the debate.

God's Peace,

Patty

Thank you for being a diplomat, Patty.  Perhaps, at this point, you understand George better than I do.  I fail to see where, apart from the quote by one of Christianity�s most notorious critics, Nietzsche, a quote for which I am responsible, this thread is insulting to Christianity or to Christians, �orthodox� or otherwise.  If I thought it were, as you know, I would be the first to rise to their (Christians�) defense.

Serv

Servetus said (diplomatically) :

"If I thought it were, as you know, I would be the first to rise to their (Christians�) defense."

I know you would.  I feel it's best to let it go at this point.  We all must learn patience and tolerance from each other.  The main point is--it must be mutual.

Peace!

Patty

�I know you would.�

Thank you, Patty.

�The main point is--it must be mutual.�

Agreed.

Servie (still reading Nietzsche)

Patty,

From you:"I honestly believe George is "up to the fight", so to speak."

That is very correct as you will see him in action on the new thread initiated by you on Crucifiction.

Regarding. "It's the lack of reciprocation where respect is concerned that has upset him. Certainly not the debate." might happen there too.

To Serv, courtesy Patty: Be kind to George, please, no-tee!

Well.  I think we understand each other perfectly.  You're such an "interesting" person.

"Servie (still reading Nietzsche)"

Pssst, are you still into that worthless dribble?

Your humble, struggling, Catholic friend,

Patty

I don't think anyone, with the exception of perhaps one, understood BMZ's first post, but I did.

BMZ, being a smart businessman would have known the Japanese bow out of respect.  He would know that he was not being "worshipped."

BMZ's purpose was to ridicule Christians for believing that Jesus is God--the incarnation--that Jesus was worshipped.

It is an insult to Orthodox Christianity and, therefore, an insult to Jesus.

Peace

(George)  �I don't think anyone, with the exception of perhaps one, understood BMZ's first post, but I did.�

I fancy that I, by name Servetus, am the exception in this case and I think that I understood him perfectly well.  I maintain that his was both a funny and insightful post.

�BMZ, being a smart businessman would have known the Japanese bow out of respect.  He would know that he was not being "worshipped."�

I would venture that BMZ�s point involves, among other things, the definition of the Greek word, proskuneo (linked above), which is translated in the King James Version as �worship.�  According to Strong�s Concordance, that original Greek word includes these as possible meanings:

�1) to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence; 2) among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence; 3) in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication; a) used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank ��

A question thus arises: according to this definition, by bowing in homage to a man of superior rank (in this case, BMZ because he was awarding an engineering contract), were the Japanese �worshipping?�

�BMZ's purpose was to ridicule Christians for believing that Jesus is God--the incarnation--that Jesus was worshipped.�

Objection, your honor.  George is imputing motive to BMZ.  I read it differently.

�It is an insult to Orthodox Christianity and, therefore, an insult to Jesus.�

Objection, your honor.  The conclusion is logically forced and is predicated upon an assumption, or imputation of (BMZ�s) motive.

Servetus

George:

Other than the passage from Nietzsche, which might be considered an affront if you believe it holds any importance, I do not believe that there was any insult intended here.

Of course, as I have probably been cast into the ranks of the unenlightened as one who did not fully understand the original post, I might be wrong.

George,

You wrote: "BMZ's purpose was to ridicule Christians for believing that Jesus is God--the incarnation--that Jesus was worshipped.

You could have simply accused me by saying,"BMZ's purpose was to negate and refute that Jesus was worshipped." and that would have have been more factual.

The Advocate Servie got me right straightaway and asked me if Matthew 9:18 was on my mind when I wrote that.

The entire presentation was to point out that Jesus was not worshipped by people. When people show or express their gratitude, they bow, kiss, kneel down beside and clasp feet. Some even fall down crying with joy.

Please read Matthew 9:8When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to men." It does not say that they worshipped Jesus. In this verse it is quite clear that they praised and worshipped God, not Jesus and were thankful to God and appreciated Jesus.

I am sure you've read about the sinful woman, who washed his feet and wiped them with her hair, kissed his feet, clasped his feet, while tears from her eyes fell. That was the most sincere respect and appreciation shown by the woman, when not a single disciple of Jesus ever washed his feet or even gave him water to wash his feet himself.

In short Jesus was never worshipped. It was still God Almighty the Lord who was worshipped, as is evident from Matthew 9:8 and similar.

My sincere thanks and appreciation to Servie for standing up for my defence and others for understanding me.

I have to go to bed now, it's 3.00 am. Good Night

BMZ

bmzsp wrote: I then found out that he was calling me, "My good fellow". BR BMZ

http://www.engrish.com - http://www.engrish.com

  I had a smidgeon of Japanese in High School and studied their culture as fanatically then as I am Islam and the Middle East now.  I found the Pharoh think hilarious.

Angela,

Please never ask the Japanese about elections at all. Do not ever discuss that.  

Hope Angel does not read this post. I ask her not to cross 1.00 am.

BR & Good Night

BMZ

BMZ said the following:

"In short Jesus was never worshipped. It was still God Almighty the Lord who was worshipped, as is evident from Matthew 9:8 and similar."

But in Christianity you cannot separate Jesus from God, as we believe in the Triune God, the Holy Trinity.  Therein lies the confusion, I think.  We do not separate God/Father/Holy Spirit.  It is the basis for our religion, or much of our religion.  There is a "oneness" or Apostolic Church which believes in "Jesus only", but they are the only one I am familiar with.

In (Phil. 2:9-11) it is stated: "the name that is above every name" and how "at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on Earth and under the Earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father"

God's Blessings to All!

Patty

 - actually, bmz, if you but knew my appalling record of behaviour at football matches.  i have been escorted from the ground by police on no less than three occasions, under threat of arrest, not for "worshipping" players, but for shouting "unacceptable" abuse at opposing supporters and the poor old ref! -- well i thought they deserved it at the time...

i was also one of the thousands who invaded the pitch at wembley stadium in 1977, in the glorious aftermath of scotlands victory over england, and while i plead guilty to digging up part of the pitch, i was not repeat not one of those who climbed up on to the crossbar and broke it.  ah, those were the days....

By the way, in the interests of board harmony, and given that it doesn�t add much to the discussion at hand (it might be worthwhile, at a further point, to discuss St. Paul in a separate thread), I am deleting my above post in which Nietzsche is quoted.  Things are disjointed enough around here, at times, without bringing him into the equation (no offense, Nietzsche).

Serv

Fredi

Patty, something you said reminded me of the explaination of Icons in the Eastern Orthodox Church vs Idolatry.  One can pray using an Icon as a focus, but you are not worshiping the Icon. 

Jesus in mainstream Christianity is God and is also an Intercessor to God.  (The intercessory part is still held by my church even if we reject the first part of that statement.) 

I so while in mainstream Chrisitanity, as they pray to Jesus they are worshipping him as part of God, but they also pray for him to intercede with the Father. 

The only Christians guilty of worshipping Jesus as a separate entity than God the Father, are Christians like me (2%).  There are a few churches that do this, not just mine.  However the majority of Chrisitans about 98% believe Jesus and God are one, therefore, they are worshipping God when they worship the Son.

Angela wrote: Fredi Patty, something you said reminded me of the explaination of Icons in the Eastern Orthodox Church vs Idolatry.  One can pray using an Icon as a focus, but you are not worshiping the Icon.  Jesus in mainstream Christianity is God and is also an Intercessor to God.  (The intercessory part is still held by my church even if we reject the first part of that statement.)  I so while in mainstream Chrisitanity, as they pray to Jesus they are worshipping him as part of God, but they also pray for him to intercede with the Father.  The only Christians guilty of worshipping Jesus as a separate entity than God the Father, are Christians like me (2%).  There are a few churches that do this, not just mine.  However the majority of Chrisitans about 98% believe Jesus and God are one, therefore, they are worshipping God when they worship the Son.

Hi Angela,

I'm guessing you're LDS.

There are also some small groups of us that worship Jesus as the Almighty God- we don't think the Father exists anymore. There are a few of demoninations that hold this doctrine. We are called Modalists.

You are quite right, Angela, in your interpretation of icons and/or statues.  We do NOT worship the statues, but focus on them as we pray.  We do NOT pray to the statues, but ask the saints/Mary to intercede for us.  It's the same as if I said to you, "Angela, I'm very ill.  I just learned I have cancer.  Will you please pray for me?"  What I am doing is asking you to intercede to God the Father for me.  We do this when we ask the angels and saints (Holy Mary being the greatest saint of all) to pray for us.  We don't pray for them to heal us, help us, but to ask God to help us.....afterall, they are much closer to God than we here on earth.  They have a little more "clout" than mere humans here on earth.  This is one big misconception about Catholics (which nearly drives me nuts.) 

I enjoy learning about your faith as well.  I do know some of it.  I have a Book of Morman, which I have read, but it is very enlightening to hear from those who believe and fully understand another faith.  We need so much to learn respect and tolerance for the faith of others.  We may even find peace if we first learn respect and tolerance.  Hate is such a dreadful emotion!  I hate, hate!!  It bothers me that people hate so much all in the name of God.  All of us are guilty, or have been, at one time or another.  It kills our souls.  Jesus was such a peacemaker.  That's one of the things I love about the Beatitudes!

Peace, Angela!

Patty

Patty: "In short Jesus was never worshipped. It was still God Almighty the Lord who was worshipped, as is evident from Matthew 9:8 and similar."

But, if Jesus is God, then they were worshipping Jesus as they are one and the same. How can you worship one without the other if they are the same thing? Actually, how can one intercede with the other if they are one and the same?

Abednego,

I've heard the term modalist only recently.  I was unaware there was such a group.  And yes, I'm LDS.

Thanks Patty,

I appreciate it when one can recognize the differences but still focus on the similarities.  Christ was about Peace and being a servant to your fellow man.  That is what I try to take with me.  I fail sometimes, but I try.  I love the sermon on the mount and the beatitudes come from that if I'm not mistaken?

Mishmish,

Again, I am in a similar boat as this never made sense to me when I was a mainstream Christian.  Probably why I'm LDS now.

George,

�Yes, it is you.  You are the one.  You get the prize.�

Please excuse my reluctance at this point, but may I please know what the prize is before I accept it?  �Beware Greeks bearing gifts� and all that �

I wrote:  �I would venture that BMZ�s point involves, among other things, the definition of the Greek word, proskuneo (linked above), which is translated in the King James Version as �worship.�  According to Strong�s Concordance, that original Greek word includes these as possible meanings ��

You responded:  �It could be that BMZ was referring to the word, proskuneo, but I doubt it.�

Please note that I did not say that BMZ was referring to the word.  I said that I would venture, or assume, that his point involves, among other things, the meaning, or definition, of the word �worship.�  And it has.

"He used the bowing Japanese to ridicule Orthodox Christianity."

Objection, your honor.  Motive is still being imputed.  Even if, and when, as he is doing now, BMZ argues that Jesus did not allow himself to be worshipped as God, it does not follow that the argument is necessarily designed to "ridicule" Orthodox Christianity and, by extension, Jesus himself. 

�There is a precedent in this case.  BMZ and I have known each other for over 3 years and we have had thousands of exchanges�yes, I said thousands�I did not make a typo.  You see, I have seen this kind of thing before�on sites that do not moderate like they do here.  That is why I said that there is a precedent.�

The two of you have a history.  That is clear.  The prior �precedents,� however, are not quite so clear.

�I also got an opinion from another Judge. BMZ's "intent is crystal clear."  He is guilty as charged.  He's off to jail and does not collect $200.�

That judge must have been a Bush-appointee.  In any case, I have bailed BMZ out of jail and hope that he continues to post his funny and insightful journal entries.

Thanks for the subsequent article.  On most of its major points, you won�t find much argument, or disagreement, from my side.

Over and out,

Servetus

George wrote: To Servetus,  (George)  �I don't think anyone, with the exception of perhaps one, understood BMZ's first post, but I did.� Servetus wrote: ] I fancy that I, by name Servetus, am the exception in this case and I think that I understood him perfectly well.  I maintain that his was both a funny and insightful post. Yes, it is you.  You are the one.  You get the prize.  �BMZ, being a smart businessman would have known the Japanese bow out of respect.  He would know that he was not being "worshipped."� Servetus wrote: I would venture that BMZ�s point involves, among other things, the definition of the Greek word, proskuneo (linked above), which is translated in the King James Version as �worship.�  According to Strong�s Concordance, that original Greek word includes these as possible meanings: �1) to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence; 2) among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence; 3) in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication; a) used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank �� It could be that BMZ was referring to the word, proskuneo, but I doubt it.  BMZ is saying that Jesus' followers did not worship Jesus they just bowed in respect, which is not what the NT teaches. Servetus wrote: A question thus arises: according to this definition, by bowing in homage to a man of superior rank (in this case, BMZ because he was awarding an engineering contract), were the Japanese �worshipping?� No, BMZ would know that they weren't worshipping him.  He would have made it his business to know what their customs are and what they mean.  He used the bowing Japanese to ridicule Orthodox Christianity. �BMZ's purpose was to ridicule Christians for believing that Jesus is God--the incarnation--that Jesus was worshipped.� Servetus wrote: Objection, your honor.  George is imputing motive to BMZ.  I read it differently. There is a precedent in this case.  BMZ and I have known each other for over 3 years and we have had thousands of exchanges�yes, I said thousands�I did not make a typo.  You see, I have seen this kind of thing before�on sites that do not moderate like they do here.  That is why I said that there is a precedent. �It is an insult to Orthodox Christianity and, therefore, an insult to Jesus.� Servetus wrote: Objection, your honor.  The conclusion is logically forced and is predicated upon an assumption, or imputation of (BMZ�s) motive.  No, it is based on precedent.  Please see above.  I also got an opinion from another Judge. BMZ's "intent is crystal clear."  He is guilty as charged.  He's off to jail and does not collect $200. Now about the word, " proskuneo." Please is a short and good article analyzing the word " proskuneo." http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5379 There are many Christian documents that show that his early followers thought he was divine.  I've looked them all over.  Here is one early quote: Pliny the Younger (c. A.D. 62-113): Governor of Bithynia in northwestern Turkey, writing a letter to the emperor Trajan about the Christian movement, dated A.D. 111: "I have never been present at an examination of Christians. Consequently, I do not know the nature of the extent of the punishments usually meted out to them, nor the grounds of starting an investigation and how far it should be pressed ... I have asked them if they are Christians, and if they admit it, I repeat the question a second and third time, with a warning of the punishment awaiting them. If they persist, I order them to be led away for execution; for, whatever the nature of their admission, I am convinced that their stubbornness and unshakable obstinacy ought not to go unpunished ... They also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error to be no more than this: They had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately amongst themselves in honor of Christ as if to a God, and also bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft, robbery, and adultery ... This made me decide that it was all the more necessary to extract the truth by torture from two slave-women whom they call deaconesses. I found nothing but a degenerate sort of cult carried to extravagant lengths." The fixed day was Sunday the day Jesus rose from the dead.  Notice the Christians worshipped Christ "as if to a God." Orthodox Christians believe that the Word of God became flesh in the human body of Jesus Christ and that he was worshipped.  Anyone ridiculing that belief is ridiculing Orthodox Christianity and in our eyes, ridiculing God himself and that is blasphemy.   BismillahirRahmaanirRaheem,   George, this is a Muslim site, and this is a basic belief that we disagree with and could say exactly the same thing as you.  This is called SHIRK, and it is the only UNFORGIVABLE sin, as stated in the Holy Quran.  And it is also a blasphemy to our faith to say what you have said here.    Say Allah is ONE, Allah is Eternal, He was not born nor does he give birth, And there is no other like Him.

MashahAllah, Serv and Bmz!  You are two gentlemen indeed!

Mishmish wrote: Patty: "In short Jesus was never worshipped. It was still God Almighty the Lord who was worshipped, as is evident from Matthew 9:8 and similar." But, if Jesus is God, then they were worshipping Jesus as they are one and the same. How can you worship one without the other if they are the same thing? Actually, how can one intercede with the other if they are one and the same?

Bismillah,

Ameen.

Fredi, the famous English Soccer Hooligan

"if you but knew"

I just loved it the way you used.  

BR

BMZ

Patty,

From you: "In (Phil. 2:9-11) it is stated: "the name that is above every name" and how "at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on Earth and under the Earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father"".

Patty, all the prophecies quoted and told in respect of Jesus, are mostly taken from Isaiah, so Isaiah should reign supreme, not Phil.

However, if we read Phil 2:9-11, it still clearly maintains a difference and distinction between God the Father and Jesus by calling him a Lord. Anyway, my main point is that Isaiah stands supreme in this particular regard that I have brought up.

Now, if we look at Isaiah 45:21-24, we don't have to look to Phil. 2:9-11 at all. The point is made by God Almighty in Isaiah and I am sure you will agree with me that Phil. 2 is not a gospel.

"Declare what is to be, present it - let them take counsel together. Who foretold this long ago, who declared it from the distant past?

Was it not I, the Lord? And there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Saviour, there is none but me.

"Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God and there is no other. By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear. They will say of me, 'In the Lord alone are righteous and strength.' " All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame."

No one can change the above, not even Phil. Who should we listen to here and who should we believe, Patty? Isaiah or Phil.? As for myself, an outsider, I will go with what was Commanded in Isaiah as God has clearly sworn mightily. Not an iota of Isaiah 45:21-24 can be changed, according to the teachings of Jesus.

Are we in agreement with above?

Best Regards

BMZ

George,

From you:" Orthodox Christians believe that the Word of God became flesh in the human body of Jesus Christ and that he was worshipped.  Anyone ridiculing that belief is ridiculing Orthodox Christianity and in our eyes, ridiculing God himself and that is blasphemy."

Regarding above, I have a few comments and observations:

1. None of the other three gospel writers have the approach taken by John. He is the only one to have introduced "the word". When I read John, I smell somebodyelse in this philosophy dictated. Only John introduces this concept or a theory which even Jesus did NOT teach or spoke about.

I am 100% sure that Jesus never said anything about being the "Word of God" before God and became a God. This is further confirmed by Matthew, Mark and Luke's failure to mention anything of this sort.

2. This is where I always emphasise that all scriptures are to be understood only from the language spoken by their prophets and the people.

3. Please allow me to say something about the "Word of God' as I understand it being a literate in English, Urdu, Arabic and Malay languages, myself. Please read it with an open mind and very carefully, as you know very well that I write only my thoughts out and do not quote from unnecessary links.

What then is this Word or Words of God?

The Word of God: It simply means that any "Word of God" was just a thought in God's mind before God brought it out into existence or created the thought. Thus, the Creation of the Universe and the Creation of Angels, Spirits, Adam and Eve, were all "Words of God" before they were created or brought into existence.

I would even go further than that by saying that your goodself, all others and me were also "Word of God" before being brought out into existence and becoming flesh . All of us were not there before 19-- something at all!

Note: 19-- (The Twentieth Century, please fill in the blanks) For example, I was not brought out into this world before 1985!  

I sincerely hope you would not consider this any blasphemy.

BMZ

What was all that George? I have just been bailed out by Serv. I am sure no one will bail you out here!  You gave me all that for a simple horse shoe-nail?  

You quoted in vain, verses of Qur'aan, which rejects Jesus as God and son of God. Qur'aan does not confirm the Bible or the Old Testament and the New Testament. As such, the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Paul are not acknowledged and there is no mention of them either. The Torah and the Injeel of Moses and Jesus refer to what they were told and what they delivered to poeple only.

However, I am prepared to throw out John and retain my dear Prophet.   The thrust of my post was that the other three gospel writers had no smell of the word "Word". The concept was only crafted by John. Period. And todate, millions of simple folks have  been kept wondering and confused.

I don't agree with most of your not-so-sound arguments but I would like to comment on some.

Instead of going through the Word series that you gave, let me make it simple that God was right there before the beginning of anything and that is more appropriate. An example taken from your quote:

• Christ is life (John 11:25)
• Wisdom brings life (Prov. 3:16, 8:35, 9:11; Wis. 8:13)

So Wisdom gave life to Christ?

• Christ is the way to truth (John 14:6)
• Wisdom is the way (Prov. 3:17, 8:32-34; Sir. 6:26)

So, Wisdom is Christ?

You know well that I demolish Paul everytime he is brought up. Hence, I will ignore Paul. But since you mentioned, "The letters of Paul continue the identification of Jesus with God's Wisdom. 1 Corinthians 1:24, 30 is the most clear: Christ is explicitly identified as "the power of God and the wisdom of God.", I would stress that Paul always maintained that Jesus was only the son of God. Paul never called Jesus, God.

This is a fact which you cannot deny.

Also, I would not like to talk about the reference to the First Born because one of the First Born of even Issac of the Covenant made with the free woman, through the same mother, Essau had to give up his birth right to his twin brother Jacob for the sake of a red beans soup.

From you: "Hebrews also says of Jesus what Philo says of the Logos."

Look, George, I am keen to know if Jesus ever talked about Logos, taught and explained it. To me, it is not important what others thought of him after he was long gone.

Why is there this sudden interest in Targums, George? Targum is simply translation in Hebrew or Aramaic and you would be shocked to know that tarjum or tarjuma is the same word in Arabic but the targums are slightly more than a translation as they explain a bit.

Let's take a look at this quoted by you:

"1. Genesis 1:27, "God created man.""

"The Word of the Lord created man. (Targum Pseudo-Jonathan)"

For me and others, Genesis 1:27 would be straightforward and more factual. The other is to somehow justify that the "Word" created man. This is where you have shot yourself in your own foot and my post gets validated. It still means that God created the man.

2. Genesis 6:6-7, "And it repented the Lord that he made man on the earth." (OK, here the Lord is regretting creating man)

And it repented the Lord through his Word that he made man on the earth. (Here, the Lord is again regretting, not his Word. The Word cannot regret)

3. Genesis 15:6, "And Abraham believed in the Lord." (Fine and OK)

And Abraham believed in the Word of the Lord. (This is Ok and shows Abraham believed in the words of his Lord, meaning whatever his Lord said)

George, by making the 'W' of the "w" of the word Bold/capital, nothing is solved.  In fact, simplicity is compromised with confusion.

Now look at this: "4. Isaiah 45:17, "Israel will be saved by the Lord.""

OK, if that happens, we will say that Israel has been saved by the Lord God.

"Israel will be saved by the Word of the Lord."

This means that when the Lord God commands, Israel will be saved. It is not as if the 'Word' is a power or host who will go on it's own and save Israel.

What you are trying to say is that the Word of God is also another God besides God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost, is that so?  or you want to merge it with Jesus. If you do that, Jesus becomes superior to God. My loss!  But I am happy with my current status of being a Muslim.

Thank you, Herjihad, I have always enjoyed reading your posts as well.

Serv 

Hello bmz,

I have just one question to ask.  Since apparently Muslims do not believe the words of any prophets or apostles, other than Jesus Himself, in plain English how do you explain Jesus' words to Saint Phillip after Phillip had asked Jesus to "show us the Father", and Jesus replied ""Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?"  From John 14:9.

In John 14:6-7, Jesus also said (to Thomas)

Hello Patty,

Good question. Like George, I am no scholar. I am an Engineer, a Lawyer (not a practising one though and only use the knowledge to fight construction litigations and cost claims, if someone tries to play me or my friends out) with a third degree in Advanced Physics and Mathematics and I dabble in Literature and scriptures. Thus the habit of analysing.

Your question:"I have just one question to ask.  Since apparently Muslims do not believe the words of any prophets or apostles, other than Jesus Himself, in plain English how do you explain Jesus' words to Saint Phillip after Phillip had asked Jesus to "show us the Father", and Jesus replied ""Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?"  From John 14:9."

Very simple but please keep in mind that the above is a trasnlation from Greek into English of a Semitic language. It means that Jesus tarried with them so long, taught them about God, preached to them, showed miracles by the power of God, explained the parables to them in private and yet they asked him the silly question, "Show us the Father". Most of the disciples were Jews and the Jews had even asked Moses to show them God. It was natural of them to ask Jesus the same question and he sounds fed up at that point.

The phrase "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father" simply means that by following me you have followed what the Father wants or that I lead you to God. It does not mean,"If you have seen me, you should know that I am God or God is me." Please mark his statement. He never said that he was God.

This is very common in the Oriental languages. I will give you an example. A boy knows a girl intimately well but has never met or seen her mother. He asks the girl,"How does your mother look like?" The girl replies."If you have seen me, you have seen my mother.", meaning they may have similar features, look alike in body and face, may be habits too. But the girl and her mother are not one person. 

"In John 14:6-7, Jesus also said (to Thomas) Jesus said to him, "I am the way and the truth ^{http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/john/john14.htm#foot5 - 5} and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

In other words, he is saying,"Look I show you the way to God, the truth and life. I lead you to God." Please note that Jesus still maintains that the Father or God is a different entity for he never said, "Look, I am the God, the father." And they thought they had seen God! people.

Patty, that language is figurative and we know that the disciples never fully understood him. When they could not fully understand and believe him, what can we expect from those who came after him and debated him? Hope this helped.

Best Regards

BMZ

Bismillah,

Brother BMZ, thanks for all of your hard work on the research in this discussion.  I am reading the comments and appreciate your effort. 

herjihad,

Salaam Alaikum and thanks for the encouragement.

I am really fascinated by your nickname here.  Instead of bmzsp, I should have registered my name as MyJihad. Can that still be done here?  Hope peacemaker can throw some light on this?

Best Regards

BMZ

Bismillah,

Ma'ShahAllah!  That's a good one -- Someone told me once that she wanted to change hers but that she'd have to register again under the new name.  Maybe Moderator Peacemaker could enligten us as to the possibilities...

Because MyJihad is the whole point for my name and my life:  Taking care of the kids fee sabeel Allah. (in Allah's service?).  So I thought that other people should say Her Jihad for that...

And BMZ means?

herjihad,

I have already sent you a PM telling you what does BMZ stand for.

Best Regards & Salaam Aalikum

BMZ

Assalamu Alaikum!

bmz,

Regarding change of user name, please contact the administration as I don't deal with that, brother.

Peace

Wa Alaikum Assalaam, peacemaker.

Don't worry about that. It's all right. Thanks.

BR

BMZ

Hi BMZ!  I must respectfully disagree with your personal interpretation of the Gospel of John.  You see, I don't believe that Jesus ever spoke words of confusion, or said anything which would lead to confusion amongst His disciples.  Quite the contrary....they knew EXACTLY to what He was referring.  He was telling them He was God.  They knew this and spread the word.  The Bible refers to Satan as the master of confusion, NOT Jesus.  So, let's just say we agree to disagree on this very important aspect of Christianity.  I respect your right to interpret it as you see fit, but we need mutual respect here.  And on that note, I would like to post the following article, which I believe put many things in their proper perspective.  (We all know, I believe, that we are NOT going to change anyone's mind about their beliefs, right?)So I think it's essential that we are able to discuss and present our faith as we believe it, without the expectations of swaying another to "our" side.  It's a little lengthy, but well worth the read, imo. (I, myself, detest long posts....my attention span can't handle them.)

God's Blessings to All,

Patty

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Cross Meets Crescent: An Interview with Kenneth Cragg

George,

From you: "Jesus is the Savior and not anyone else.

Isaiah 43: 11. I, I am the Lord, and besides Me there is no Savior."

Sorry, George! You can't sell that to anyone and no one will buy that! Instead of just quoting a single-line statement Isaiah 43:11, please quote the following also in future:

The statement above is from God Almighty, not Jesus. The under-mentioned statement by God Almighty is more appropriate and valid:

" Isaiah 45:21-24

"Declare what is to be, present it - let them take counsel together. Who foretold this long ago, who declared it from the distant past?

Was it not I, the Lord? And there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Saviour, there is none but me.

"Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God and there is no other. By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear. They will say of me, 'In the Lord alone are righteous and strength.' " All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame."

From you:"Makes no difference, BMZ.  The translation does not change the meaning."

George, How about the big one Isaiah 45:21-24? It makes a very huge difference, George. God has clearly declared that there is no other god or God. Period. You cannot deny that.

"George, How about the big one Isaiah 45:21-24? It makes a very huge difference, George. God has clearly declared that there is no other god or God. Period. You cannot deny that."

That's where the triune comes in handy Brother.

Mishmish,

""George, How about the big one Isaiah 45:21-24? It makes a very huge difference, George. God has clearly declared that there is no other god or God. Period. You cannot deny that."

That's where the triune comes in handy Brother."

With that crystal clear Declaration of Integrity by God, the question of trinity and a triune God does not arise and should not have arisen at all.   "Period" cannot describe that and I have to say, Stop Post!

Will write on the cause of  triune God or Trinity later, based on my understanding of the written English of the NT scripture.   Please stay tuned.

BR & Salaam Alaikum

BMZ

Hello Patty, Greetings!

Same here. I just don't feel like responding to very long posts but I can read them without commenting.

Thanks for the article.

Best Regards

BMZ

bmzsp wrote: George,   From you: "Jesus is the Savior and not anyone else.   Isaiah 43: 11. I, I am the Lord, and besides Me there is no Savior."   Sorry, George! You can't sell that to anyone and no one will buy that! Instead of just quoting a single-line statement Isaiah 43:11, please quote the following also in future:   The statement above is from God Almighty, not Jesus. The under-mentioned statement by God Almighty is more appropriate and valid:   " Isaiah 45:21-24 "Declare what is to be, present it - let them take counsel together. Who foretold this long ago, who declared it from the distant past? Was it not I, the Lord? And there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Saviour, there is none but me. "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God and there is no other. By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear. They will say of me, 'In the Lord alone are righteous and strength.' " All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame." From you:"Makes no difference, BMZ.  The translation does not change the meaning." George, How about the big one Isaiah 45:21-24? It makes a very huge difference, George. God has clearly declared that there is no other god or God. Period. You cannot deny that.

BMZ, please read my post more carefully.

To repeat:

George wrote: The Hebrew word moshi'a (savior) occurs more than 30 times in the Bible, almost every time with reference to someone other than Yahweh.  So, for example, it is written in Judges 3:9 that when the Israelites cried out to the Lord, he raised up a savior (or deliverer) for them (cf. also Judge. 3:15; 12:3), and in Isaiah 19:20, God promiseses that he will one day send Egypt a savior and defender who will rescue them�again with reference to someone other than the Lord.  In a similar way, Isaiah 33:22 says tht God is our lawgiver, judge, and king, but we know, of course, tht he used Moses to give us the law, that he raised up numerous judges for Israel, and that the Messiah is known as King Messiah.   The simple point is this:  God, the only Savior, uses whom he will to deliver his people, and both traditional Judaism and the New Testament recognized that the Messiah would be the Lord's appointed Savior par excellence.

bmz wrote: George, How about the big one Isaiah 45:21-24? It makes a very huge difference, George. God has clearly declared that there is no other god or God. Period. You cannot deny that.

Of course, there is only one God, BMZ.  No Christian would deny that.  We are talking about saviors.  God is our savior and only he determines how he saves us.  He uses men as indicated above.  And he used his Messiah.

There is no contradiction.

Peace

Abednego,

In your post to Angela, you wrote: "There are also some small groups of us that worship Jesus as the Almighty God- we don't think the Father exists anymore. There are a few of demoninations that hold this doctrine. We are called Modalists.

Brother, what happened to the Father and the Holy Spirit? Were they consumed by Jesus?  Also, brother, do the Modalists also have a Comforter?

I look forward to your enlightening views on this matter.

"Of course, there is only one God, BMZ.  No Christian would deny that.  We are talking about saviors.  God is our savior and only he determines how he saves us.  He uses men as indicated above.  And he used his Messiah."

But isn't His Messiah, Him?

Mishmish,

In this unilateral statement, declared with full Integrity by God Almighty, it's crystal clear that God saves. That is what my dear friend George is not able to see. How God uses men to save people is not the issue in above. Let's repeat this again as it helps:

" Isaiah 45:21-24

"Declare what is to be, present it - let them take counsel together. Who foretold this long ago, who declared it from the distant past?

Was it not I, the Lord? And there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Saviour, there is none but me.

"Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God and there is no other. By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear. They will say of me, 'In the Lord alone are righteous and strength.' " All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame."

Geroge wrote: "Of course, there is only one God, BMZ.  No Christian would deny that."

Now that is progress. 

George wrote: "We are talking about saviors.  God is our savior and only he determines how he saves us.  He uses men as indicated above.  And he used his Messiah."

Mishmish, many Messiahs were sent to save Israel. Moses was the biggest Messiah who delivered them out of Pharoah's slavery and bondage. But Moses' disciples, having seen miracles upon miracles, did not make a God out of him. The title of Messiah is not really reserved for Jesus according to the Jews. Jews had plenty of Messiahs. God used many of his Messiahs to help and save people. But God himself did not become a Messiah. We have no evidence of that in the history.

There is something positive in George's comment "And he sent his Messiah" which I would prefer to re-write as "And he sent his second-last Messiah to help people come back to the true path of God."

From you Mishmish, the comment: "But isn't His Messiah, Him?"

Certainly not. George just confirmed that God saved by sending men. Thus the Messiah Jesus was a man and he tried his best to save the Jews. God's Messiah is definitely not HIM and God himself has never come down before as a Messiah, thus God is not His own Messiah.

That is why, I always tell my Christian friends to read and find out themselves that Jesus never taught Trinity or anything about the Original Sin which suggests defeat of God by Satan, making God feel helpless, sad and defeated and not knowing what to do for milleniums and kept thinking of a way on how to beat Satan, which of course is not true.  If you read the temptation and trial of Jesus by Satan, you will note that the "spirit" led him into the desert to be tried and tempted by satan/Devil. All of us know very well, incuding our Christian and Jewish friends that God can never be tempted or tried by Satan. Jesus was thus clearly no more than a man. By the way, do you happen to know who was this "spirit"?

I am sure it was not a good one. Nothing in the Bible can explain God better than Isaiah 45:21-24. I hope you agree with me on this.

BR & Salaam Alaikum

BMZ

Abednego is a modalist.  This describes their beliefs:

Sabellianism (modalism) is rejected by most types of Christianity. It is accepted primarily by some Pentecostal groups, sometimes referred to as Oneness Pentecostals or "Jesus Only" Pentecostals.

Historic Sabellianism taught that God the Father was the only person of the Godhead. This teaching purports that the identity of God the Father and Jesus is the same. According to this belief, the terms "Father" and "Holy Spirit" both describe the one God who dwelt in Jesus. Some Oneness detractors call this the "Jesus-Only doctrine".

BMZ,

BMZ, Isaiah 45:21-24 is talking about the fact that there is only one God and when I agreed, you saying "that is progress" is an inaccurate and an unkind remark from you.  When have I ever said that was more than one God?

There is only one savior�God.  God uses men to save, just as he used Moses and just as he used King Messiah, Jesus.  True there have been many "messiahs," but there is only one King Messiah and that is Jesus.

Show me in the Qur'an where Muhammad is called a Messiah.  The only Messiah mentioned in the Qur'an is Jesus.

Peace

Assalamu Alaikum BMZ:

I was kind of being facetious when I wrote that. I noted that George had written: "He uses men as indicated above.  And he used his Messiah.""  and it struck me as rather odd wording for a Christian who believes Jesus to be God.

Just as he has written here: "God uses men to save, just as he used Moses and just as he used King Messiah, Jesus."  again indicating that Jesus was/is a man.

Perhaps I am reading it wrong, but that does seem to be the implication.

Yes! Mishmish, it struck me too.

"Just as he has written here: "God uses men to save, just as he used Moses and just as he used King Messiah, Jesus."  again indicating that Jesus was/is a man.

Perhaps I am reading it wrong, but that does seem to be the implication.

You read it right and I read it right too. Calling Jesus Messiah or a King Messiah does not prove anything. There was neither any saving of Israel when he was there nor he was a king of Israel. That is why the Jews totally rejected him. Will write more later.  

Best Regards & Salaam Alaikum

BMZ

Today, the Japanese worshipped me less. They were so tired and exhausted that they bowed very little.

This one is to take heat off the other topics. This has nothing to do with the worshipping.

I am tired too and it is beyond my bedtime. Good Night everyone

BMZ