Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Ask me anything about Islam and I'll try to answer it as well as I can.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    REPLY PART !

    Regarding Matthew 26:28 Jesus was referring to himself as the scape goat /lamb which is central to the Mosaic law. Central to the OT Mosaic law is that animal sacrifices are found all throughout books in the Old Testament. These blood offerings acted as a temporary covering for sin. In Leviticus 4:35, you get a clear picture of the process and the purpose. Through this process, the priest will purify the people from their sin, making them right with the Lord, and they will be forgiven.
    NOPE, Jesus NEVER referred himself as the scapegoat/lamb to be sacrificed nor was blood sacrifice central to Mosaic law. You forgot that Jesus was NOT willing to die – he prayed to God to be saved from the Jews. Common sense should tell you that if Jesus knew he was to be sacrificed for the sin of all mankind, he would have shown his appreciation to the Jews for their intention to kill him (that’s so funny!) and NOT have prayed to God to save him.

    In the Torah, blood sacrifices were not the only path to atonement; there were other ways to achieve forgiveness. For example, incense served to atone for the people in Numbers 16:46-47, and giving charity is described in Exodus 30:15-16 and Numbers 31:50 as `making atonement for your lives’. Even flour could be used for a sin offering (Leviticus 5:11). Clearly, blood sacrifice is NOT central nor was it a prerequisite for atonement.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    You ask where in the whole Bible did Jesus say he came to die for the sin of all man? Jesus said it implicitly rather than explicitly. But it is clear. Jesus did say that he would die, voluntarily as a sacrifice. Read the following in their literary context with each other.
    In Luke 9:22-2 Jesus Says He Must Die. 22 Then Jesus said, “The Son of Man must suffer many things. He will be rejected by the older Jewish leaders, the leading priests, and teachers of the law. And he will be killed. But after three days he will be raised from death.” Luke 9:22-2
    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
    Not really. The circumstances he was in tells us Jesus was expecting to be killed just as a soldier expected to be killed every time he was sent into the war zones. Jesus also understand all prophets of God will undergo sufferings, rejected and mocked and some are even killed for preaching the Words of God and thus, he expected himself to undergo the same sufferings. In saying he ‘will be raised on the third day’, Jesus was making a reference to Hosea 6:2 in which all the dead will be raised on the third day.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    “this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.” Matthew 26:28
    In Matthew 26:28, Jesus was speaking figuratively, NOT literally and you can refer back to my previous explanation on this passage.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    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.
    On the last day/day of judgment, Jesus will be sitting on the right side of God and he will be the witness to the people of his time and he will exalt or raise up the status of those who have listen to him and believe in the One God Almighty and they will have eternal life.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father;… and I lay down my life for the sheep… … because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father." John 10:14-18

    Expectedly, Christians would quote John 10:14-18 to ‘prove’ that Jesus willingly died for the sins of man. This, of course, is far from the truth because they have misunderstood the phrase “lay down my life on my own accord” or “sacrifice (my life) voluntarily”. In context, ‘lay down my life’ simply means to be fully committed to one’s mission or cause, as I could say “I lay down (sacrifice) my life for my family” which would mean I am fully committed to my family’s well-being. The word ‘authority’ in John 10:18 is translated from the Greek word ‘exousia’ and the very first meaning in the Lexicon Strong’s G1849 of the word is ‘power of choice, liberty of doing as one pleases’. So what Jesus was saying in John 10:18 is “I am fully committed to God’s cause. No one can take that from me. The choice I made is my own (voluntarily) – I have the choice to be fully committed to that cause or not (to be committed) but I choose to be fully committed to serve God and this is what God had commanded (or expected from me)”.


    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    Regarding John 11:25 -27 -Jesus says “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die". This is obviously far more than just Jesus saying he is some kind of “sign of the resurrection”.
    The context of this passage begins 2 verses earlier when Jesus said “Your brother will rise again” and Martha responded “I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day”. It’s only then, that Jesus said “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die". It’s obviously clear that Jesus was responding to Martha and thus his response was also related to the resurrection at the last day as mentioned by Martha, and since his response is related the Day of Resurrection, then, it’s logical to believe that Jesus is referring to his second coming which would also be a sign that the Day of Resurrection/the Last Day would be upon us (“I am the Resurrection”, that is, “I am the sign that the Day of Resurrection is upon us”). Do I need to explain to you what “one who believes in me will live, even though they die" mean ??

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified… Very truly I tell you, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds.25 Anyone who loves their life will lose it, while anyone who hates their life in this world will keep it for eternal life. 26 Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be. My Father will honour the one who serves me. John 12.24-26

    31 Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. 32 And I, when I am lifted up[g] from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” 33 He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die. John 12.32 -33.

    Clearly all of this is about the salvation that Jesus provides through his death and sacrifice.
    Only in your preconceived mind that Jesus is God and God came to die for all your sins. Like WHAT ??!! And you should know John 12:33 is the words of the scribes/writers, NOT Jesus Christ.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    And then there were the parables -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 3days later.
    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).
    And I have already explained what the sign of Jonah is, and it’s not about the 3 days and 3 nights !! If it’s that simple, Jesus would not even have termed it as a ‘sign’ !!

    And read John 2:19 in context, and not just read what other people wants you to believe. If you don’t know what’s the context of John 2:19, tell me and I will explain to you.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    Regarding Jesus as The Door, Moses and Abraham never said “I am The Door”. And they certainly never said that through their blood a new covenant would herald in a new covenant. Note Jesus said I am THE Door. Not I am a door. Also as he came later than Moses and Abraham he would have said I am a door in the line of Moses and Abraham.
    It’s not just what Jesus said, it’s what he meant by what he said. Your responses tell me you don’t really read my postings, but you probably just skimmed through them, and that explains why you keep on making comments that I have responded to.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    In regards to the covenant being not only with Israel and Judah but also with the non Jewish peoples I apologise for my poor referencing. Please refer to Hosea 2.23.
    As indeed he says in Hosea, ‘Those who were not my people I will call "my people," and her who was not beloved I will call "beloved."’ 26 ‘And in the very place where it was said to them, "You are not my people," there they will be called "sons of the living God."’ Hosea 2.23.
    I don’t know which part of my comments are you referring to here. Can you quote which comment are you commenting here ?? You should quote the comments you are responding to individually in your posting responses, and not just respond ‘en bloc’ style. Every time you said “in regards to..” or “you said…” I have to trace back to see whether I really said what you said I said, and that is time-consuming. So, if you can, quote and comment directly to my comments ? Please ?

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    You ask and in which law is a loving relationship/friendship being preached ? you need to read the Bible rather than just cherry pick verses that suit your view. Have you ever read it from cover to cover? I have asked you that before and you did not respond. If you had you would know the OT is full of references to God desiring a loving relationship / friendship. Take the Psalms and Song of Songs for instance.
    Instead of going round the bush, why don’t just answer in which law is a loving relationship/friendship being preached ?? That’s quite easy to answer, don’t you think so ??

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    In terms of the priests are in cahoots to kill Jesus again you need to keep better track of your posts. My point being they wanted to kill him due to the perceived blasphemy in him claiming to be The Son of God. The onus is on you to prove it was for some other reason other than blasphemy.
    I have already quoted your own words on this matter. So, just admit that you did not know that in your own Bible, there are clear verses to show the priests were in cahoots to kill Jesus, instead of twisting and turning your own words, and making yourself looks pretty hypocritical.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    You asked me to show you where the redemption of Jesus blood is in the Law. Animal sacrifices are found all throughout books in the Old Testament. These blood offerings acted as a temporary covering for sin. In Leviticus 4:35, you get a clear picture of the process and the purpose. Through this process, the priest will purify the people from their sin, making them right with the Lord, and they will be forgiven.Like I said You need to familiarise yourself with the blood sacrifice requirement central to the Mosaic law which the most two important Jewish festivals celebrate. These being Yom Kippur / Day of Atonement and Passover.
    Repeated comment. Refer back to my previous explanation on this.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    You ask was Jesus not a symbol of righteousness. No he is not a symbol of righteous. He is “The Door” to righteousness.
    How can he be the ‘door’ to righteousness if he himself is not a symbol of righteous ??!

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    Regarding Jesus saying that only those who listen to him and believe in Him (that is, God Almighty) will inherit the eternal life, let me repeat he also said a lot more than that alone. Please don’t just cherry pick verses outside the literary context of the Bible as a whole. All you are doing as a result is constructing the Gospel according to Jerry Myers !
    Sure, he said more than that, BUT, ALL of Jesus’ sayings on eternal life are based on these 2 principles – listen to what he’s sayings and believe in THE God Almighty. So, what other sayings of Jesus on eternal life that are not based on these simple principles ??

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    Regarding S/son of God’ being synonymous with ‘S/servant of God’ in the Scripture you are wrong. While The Mesiah will be a servant the fact the term ‘Son of God’ is clear. The Jews were familiar with the title "Son of God", as they were familiar with the title "Messiah" in the OT. There are numerous instances of The Son of God with a Mesianic meaning.
    And as I said you are wrong in saying its only in the NT that we see people trying to translate S/son of God (as applied to Jesus) as God the Son. The fact is there are a number of Old Testament verses that do speak of God's only begotten Son. You ask about Isaiah 9:6 – 7. Let me explain it and Proverbs 30:4 to you. Both verses mention a eternal “Son”.
    Isa 9:6 - For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
    Pro 30:4 -Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Whose hands have gathered up the wind? Who has wrapped up the waters in a cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is the name of his son?
    I thought you said you will explain to me Isaiah 9:6-7, but instead you just quote Isaiah 9:6-7 and Proverbs 30:4 ???!! You called that ‘explain’ ???!!

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    You are starting to lapse into logical fallacies again JM. You made a straw man argument in stating Jesus is not God the Son because the Holy Spirit descended on other people and not just him. And now you fall into the fallacy of special pleading in stating It is not proven Jesus is God the Son from the Words of God Almighty or His prophets. This is special pleading as you need to show where Mohmad said “I am the comforter as mentioned by Jesus”.
    You are starting to lapse into logical fallacies again, Acts2. I need NOT show you where Muhammad said “I am the Comforter as mentioned by Jesus” just as I don’t need you to show me where in your Bible, did Jesus say “I am the prophet who God promised to Moses”, unless, of course, if I use your so-called ‘common sense’, which turned out to be just nonsense.

    Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
    Of course it is figurative that Jesus calls God Father. No one believes God had a wife and had a child ! what you also need to know however is that ‘Son’ also means heir. A heir is the child that inherits from the parent. In Jesus case as The Son of God he inherits the full glory of The Father.
    God, the Father, is simply a general recognition of a fatherly love and compassion, by those who fear Him – “As a father has compassion on his children, so the LORD has compassion on those who fear him;” – Psalm 103:13.

    Thus, it’s only natural for Jesus to be called the son of God as he only fears God and have the same compassion towards God Almighty. Its only in the gospels, particularly, that of John’s, that this understanding of God the Father was promoted to reflect God as the literal Father of Jesus and Jesus as the eternal Son of God. It's OK if you cannot understand it, as I don’t really expect you to.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      REPLY PART 2

      Regarding Daniel 7 you are obviously starting to crack. I accused you of having a preconceived closed mindset from your comment – Quote … “So, why don’t you explain to me Daniel 7 in your own words and I will tell you how your preconceived mind has prevented you (once again) from seeing the truth.
      This straight away indicates a a preconceived closed mindset on your behalf. You have no place in these forums with such a closed mind. In you the proverb is true. Don’t cast pearls before swine. If you get banned from this site for trolling don’t go taking a self righteous view of yourself.
      And you still have not explained to me, in your own words, what Daniel 7 is about !! What you seems to be good at is going round the bush while avoiding the subject matter of the discussion !!

      If I do get banned from this site, it’s because Christians here could NOT bear the truth of what I am saying. But it’s OK if I do get banned as they prosecuted prophets for telling the truth and some of them are even killed, so, ‘killing’ my voice for speaking the truth here would be nothing new too.

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      Do you admit you don’t know where this lost record of “The sayings of Jesus is ? Do you admit even if they existed you don’t know what happened to them? Do you admit you don’t know how would they have been lost, who was responsible for losing them and when approximately would this have occurred?
      Anyway you go on to possibly agree that the eye witness Gospel accounts we have today are exactly the same as in Mohamads day but that only demonstrates and proves the Scripture had been corrupted by the time Muhammad received his Revelation and that’s why God told him to tell the ‘People of the Book’ to revert back to the original teaching of Jesus and Moses instead of following the lies of the early church. However there is a problem with your logic JM. That being if it had been corrupted, why did Allah and Mohmad attest to its truth ?
      Your defence falls apart in stating it’s not God who was not able to keep His Words in preserving the Injeel but its man. Your failure is to realise it amounts to the same thing.
      Your comment that the Quran is the same as since the time of Adam is just a Muslim fairy tale.
      Why do you keep repeating your comments ??! Can I suggest you quote my exact comments when you are responding and not respond ‘en bloc’ ?? That way it should minimize, if not, totally stop you from repeating the same comments.

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      Further more you have provided no evidence to any ‘lost Injeel’ that Jesus preached a message different from what is found in Mark, John, Luke and Mathew.
      Well, then, tell me what Gospel did Jesus preach in his lifetime and what ‘gospels’ did your church preachers preach today ??

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      Also you need to know this. Your Quran is not preserved or reliable. All original copies were burnt by Uthman and the oldest Quran in existence found in Sanaa differs from your modern Quran. It is not preserved.
      Repeated comment – please refer to my earlier response.

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      Regarding the Gospel of Thomas. You were the first to mention it in the context of our discussion of ‘the lost Injeel”. I think if you were being honest with your self you would admit you did so as some kind of evidence for this mysterious ‘lost Injeel’.
      It’s not about who first mention it, it’s about why it’s mentioned. If I can remember correctly, we were touching on the words of Jesus, and I mentioned Gospel of Thomas because it contains collections of Jesus’ sayings but, it was rejected by the church which you still have NOT explain WHY. So, can you get back on track and explain WHY it was rejected instead of going round the bush ??

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      Regarding the priests being in “cahoots” with those who wanted to kill Jesus. I repeat, your original point was about the priests wanting to kill Jesus, not for blasphemy as I and others here have claimed, but rather for some other unclear reason. You need to articulate this reason and then support it from the text.
      Repeated comment – please refer to my earlier response on this.

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      You say the Quran narrates the past but also more than just the past. Let me quote you-
      ” I said the Quran ALSO narrates the past…, meaning it’s more than just narrating the past. I NEVER said it ONLY narrates the past”… And then you go on to say “ The violence commands in the Quran is only confined to the situations and circumstances of the time. It’s not for all times.” So let me ask you . Which one is it ? You are contradicting yourself.
      What am I contradicting ??! Are you also contradicting if you said all the OT violent verses are confined to that time period and NOT for all times ??

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      And if indeed you are saying Quran narrates “more than just the past” Are you saying the violent verses in the Quran are also relevant to the present and future? If so then groups like ISIS and Boko Haram are justified in using those violent verses in their actions. As a result your defence that violence found in the Quran can be explained contextually falls apart and the Quran actually does promote violence – for today and in the future.
      Well, show me which violent verses you found in the Quran and see whether I can explain to you or not…. and then, let’s see whether you can explain the OT violent verses.

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      You are ignorant of the synoptic Gospels and the fact that the Gospels are compilations of varied eye witness accounts. While there are variance in detail between the Gospels the broad principles exist. The fact that they differ slightly actually confirms their reliability as it indicates there was not a conspiracy between the writers to fabricate.
      In regards to the broad principles of truth that Christians refer to from the OT theses can be varied. These can be about any kind of life principle or teaching about life devotion and conduct.
      Variances in details make the Bible questionable. What’s more alarming is the fact that what Jesus preached in his lifetime is totally different than what the church preachers preach today. If you see no difference in them, then, clearly you are ignorant of what Jesus really preached in his lifetime.

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      Oh “cutting their hands off or plucking their eyes out” verse being violent. This is a very weak argument JM and I think you know it ! Hey how about this one ! Jesus was a carpenter and probably hammered nails ‘violently’! Why don’t you use that one ?
      Was Jesus hammering nails ‘violently’ recorded in the Scripture ?? This is a very weak argument, Act2 and I think you know it !!

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      In regards to Biblical interpretation principles I and others here know and understand the Bible far better than you. You didn’t even know about Jeremiah 31, Yom Kippur or the Passover until I mentioned them to you. And then you try to sound the expert in interpreting them. You mentioned Bart Erhman when you haven’t even read his work. Just face it you are out of your depth. If you had integrity you would simply let issues go or admit you don’t know. You are verging on trolling.
      If that’s the best rebuttal you have on what I said about Jeremiah 31, then, your boastful claim that you ‘understand’ the Bible better than me, is only in your own self-created reality world. If you had integrity you would explain Jeremiah 31 with logic and rationale, or admit you don’t know. You are verging on trolling.

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      You tell me not to mention the violent verses in the Quran if I am not prepared to make an effort to understand them. You miss the point JM. Sure by all means explain them to me in the historical context of the day if you want. However if you do so you will be admitting you are limiting your Holy Quran to those specific contextual and historical events, thus proving your Holy Quran is not the literal, absolute Word of God to all people for all time. You will be saying the divine miracle of the Quran is limited by time and place.
      Your comparison between the hadith and Bible with mans influence has some merit. However you miss or evade the main point I made. Muslims believe the Quran is Allahs ‘divine absolute, literal recitation’ of The Word. Hence any violence found in hadith or the Bible can be explained contextually. But violence found in the Quran cannot!
      Let me say it again – if you are NOT prepared or make an effort to understand the Quran, then, don’t bring up violent verses in the Quran. In addition to that, if you are NOT prepared or make an effort to understand the Quran, then, any explanation of the Quran to you would be like giving dogs what is sacred; throwing pearls to pigs. And they may trample them under their feet and tear to pieces”, and you proved me right again and again.

      Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
      And what on earth are you talking about that I want all Muslims in the world to go around killing all non-Muslims just to prove I’m right !? I think the fact that you know I’m right that Islam is a violent religion is starting to get to you.
      What on earth are you talking now ?? You are the one who keep on insisting that Islam is a violent religion when common sense should tell you if that’s true, then, all non-Muslims living in Muslim-majority countries, would not have survived but, there are millions of non-Muslims living and working alongside Muslims in Muslim-majority countries around the world today. If you are not one of those who have NEVER stepped foot outside your own neighborhood, you should know that !! But then again, common sense is obviously NOT your forte and the fact you know I’m right about that, is starting to get to you !

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
        Again you are wrong. Have you read Erhmans “Misquoting Jesus” Jerry ? ? I have.
        Please note Erhmans quote of “The position I argue for in ‘Misquoting Jesus’ does not actually stand at odds with Prof. Metzger’s position that the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.”

        Bruce M Metzger whom Ehrman dedicates Misquoting Jesus to and refers to as “Doctor – Father” Metzger is quoted as stating the variations are minor and the significant variations do not over throw any doctrine of the church.

        Metzger goes onto say – “it ( critical NT study) has increased the basis of my personal faith to see the firmness with which these materials have come down to us with a multiplicity of copies”

        D. Wallace says “The fact is that scholars across the theological spectrum say that in all essentials – not in every particular, but in all essentials – our NT manuscripts go back to the originals. Ehrman is part of a very small minority of textual critics in what he’s saying.”

        If you have REALLY read Erhman’s “Misquoting Jesus”, then, you should know, the subject matter of his writings is NOT on the variances BUT it’s HOW the NT documents became corrupted.

        AND the fact that “the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament” only proved the truth of Psalms 17:10 “They close up their callous hearts, and their mouths speak with arrogance.


        Originally posted by Acts2 View Post
        And regarding the Gospel of Thomas it was you who deperately clutched at it as it was you that mentioned it in the first place.

        Repeated comment, BUT let me say it again - It’s NOT about who mentioned what first, it’s about WHY was it mentioned. We were touching on the sayings of Jesus and I mentioned Gospel of Thomas as it contains collections of Jesus’ sayings BUT it was rejected which, according to you, the Gospel of Thomas lacked integrity/reliability. So, I was NOT desperately clutching at it, but merely asking you what integrity/reliability that you think was lacking from the Gospel of Thomas that it was rejected by the early church ?? You think you can get back on track and answer this, instead of going round the bush again and again trying to evade the question ??

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JerryMyers View Post
          Strange. Nowhere in that passage said the Jews plainly heard Jesus claimed equality with deity, not even once, let alone, more than once !! What was VERY CLEAR was the Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be God as those are the words of the Jews, NOT Jesus, yet, you said the Jews heard Jesus claimed he’s equal to God !! Really strange, indeed !! In you, is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah !!
          Read the passage over slowly a few hundred times .... with your eyes open.
          Joh 8:36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. [NIV]

          Comment


          • Originally posted by JerryMyers View Post

            It’s amazing how the Christians can quote the Quran (and the Bible) and STILL fail to see what was actually written !!

            Clearly, God in Quran Surah 5:110 said, “by My Permission”, not once, BUT three times, which mean Jesus, on his own can do NOTHING (which, btw, was what Jesus himself admitted in the gospels) UNLESS as permitted by God Almighty. Truly, in the Christians, is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah !!
            I didn't miss "by my permission" -- I underlined it.

            Jesus saying "I can do nothing of my own" fits the Word made flesh.

            Including this story in the Qur'an proves your Allah didn't know fact from fiction, but he confirmed that Jesus is the Word made flesh.





            They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact, the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God. John 16:2

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Trucker View Post

              Read the passage over slowly a few hundred times .... with your eyes open.
              You should heed your own advice, as obviously you have been reading with your eyes closed and your imagination 'wide open'.

              But here’s your chance to prove me wrong – where in that passage did it say, imply or infer that ”the Jews plainly heard Jesus claimed equality with deity” ??

              Take your time – read the passage over slowly a few hundred times… with your eyes open.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by George View Post

                I didn't miss "by my permission" -- I underlined it.

                Jesus saying "I can do nothing of my own" fits the Word made flesh.

                Including this story in the Qur'an proves your Allah didn't know fact from fiction, but he confirmed that Jesus is the Word made flesh.
                Underlining it does NOT mean you understand it. When God Almighty says “By My Permission…”, what do you think it mean ??

                Jesus, in saying “I can do nothing of my own”, is iterating that he’s just a man created by God, that is, God uttering the Commanding Word “BE”, and the Word BEcomes flesh (man/Jesus). It’s no different when God created Light by saying “Let there BE Light, and there was light”, that is, in this case, the Word BEcome Light. The fact that you believe ‘The Word’ is an exclusive tittle to Jesus only proved that you didn’t know fact from fiction.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by JerryMyers View Post
                  Originally posted by Trucker View Post
                  Read the passage over slowly a few hundred times .... with your eyes open.
                  You should heed your own advice, as obviously you have been reading with your eyes closed and your imagination 'wide open'.

                  But here’s your chance to prove me wrong – where in that passage did it say, imply or infer that ”the Jews plainly heard Jesus claimed equality with deity” ??

                  Take your time – read the passage over slowly a few hundred times… with your eyes open.
                  I've already showed you more than once. No need for me to show a willingly blind person again.
                  Joh 8:36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. [NIV]

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Trucker View Post

                    I've already showed you more than once. No need for me to show a willingly blind person again.
                    Right. You have shown me more than once you know nothing of what Jesus really said in your own Scripture. No need for you to show me again.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JerryMyers View Post

                      Underlining it does NOT mean you understand it. When God Almighty says “By My Permission…”, what do you think it mean ??

                      Jesus, in saying “I can do nothing of my own”, is iterating that he’s just a man created by God, that is, God uttering the Commanding Word “BE”, and the Word BEcomes flesh (man/Jesus). It’s no different when God created Light by saying “Let there BE Light, and there was light”, that is, in this case, the Word BEcome Light. The fact that you believe ‘The Word’ is an exclusive tittle to Jesus only proved that you didn’t know fact from fiction.
                      God gives the command, His Word carries it out. God gives the permission.

                      Maybe this will help:

                      God created man.

                      The Word of the LORD created man (Targum Pseudo-Jonathan)

                      My point is the story of Jesus making clay birds that could fly is fiction and your Allah did not know it was fiction.

                      They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact, the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God. John 16:2

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by George View Post

                        God gives the command, His Word carries it out. God gives the permission.

                        Maybe this will help:

                        God created man.

                        The Word of the LORD created man (Targum Pseudo-Jonathan)

                        My point is the story of Jesus making clay birds that could fly is fiction and your Allah did not know it was fiction.
                        Not really, George. You seem to imply God’s Word is a separate entity, or even a person, it’s NOT. God’s Word is anything He wants it to be.

                        Maybe this will help:


                        God’s Words are the vocal expression of His intention and/or thoughts at the time He uttered those Words. In this case, God’s Word ‘BE’ is His vocal expression of His Command/intention to bring something/someone into existence or to life. Likewise, our words are the vocal expression of our intentions/thoughts, and our written words are our written expression of our thoughts and intentions. We cannot create or materialize anything into existence by just saying ‘Be’, ONLY God can do that, unless, of course, with His Permission, even you can materialize anything into existence.

                        As to your point “the story of Jesus making clay birds that could fly is fiction”, well, I do not want to get into this childish argument of “My God can do this, yours cannot, my God knew this, yours did not ..blah...blah…blah…” exchange of words with you, but really, how do you know Jesus giving life to clay birds (with God’s Permission, of course), is fiction ?? Because that story is NOT in your Bible ?? Well, Christmas or December 25 as the birth of Jesus is not in your Bible too, so, why even celebrate X’mas/the birth of Jesus on December 25 as if that’s the gospel truth when clearly it’s not even in the gospels ??
                        Last edited by Mod8; 02-22-19, 02:40 PM. Reason: ALERT / no violation

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JerryMyers View Post

                          Not really, George. You seem to imply God’s Word is a separate entity, or even a person, it’s NOT. God’s Word is anything He wants it to be.

                          Maybe this will help:

                          God’s Words are the vocal expression of His intention and/or thoughts at the time He uttered those Words. In this case, God’s Word ‘BE’ is His vocal expression of His Command/intention to bring something/someone into existence or to life. Likewise, our words are the vocal expression of our intentions/thoughts, and our written words are our written expression of our thoughts and intentions. We cannot create or materialize anything into existence by just saying ‘Be’, ONLY God can do that, unless, of course, with His Permission, even you can materialize anything into existence.

                          As to your point “the story of Jesus making clay birds that could fly is fiction”, well, I do not want to get into this childish argument of “My God can do this, yours cannot, my God knew this, yours did not ..blah...blah…blah…” exchange of words with you, but really, how do you know Jesus giving life to clay birds (with God’s Permission, of course), is fiction ?? Because that story is NOT in your Bible ?? Well, Christmas or December 25 as the birth of Jesus is not in your Bible too, so, why even celebrate X’mas/the birth of Jesus on December 25 as if that’s the gospel truth when clearly it’s not even in the gospels ??
                          Mary and Joseph were with Jesus as a child and would have used it in the New Testament. They did not.

                          We don't know when Jesus was born.

                          As to why we celebrate Christmas on December 25th:
                          The New Testament provides no precise information concerning the year of Jesus' birth. A fixed point from which to start is the fact that Jesus was born before the death of Herod the Great. According to Matthew 2:1-9, Herod was troubled by the arrival of the Wise Men asking where the king of the Jews had been born. From Josephus we learn that Herod died on or before Passover, A.U.C. 750 (that is, on or before April 4, 4 B.C.). How long before this date Jesus was born is not known. Matthew and Luke tell of certain events that occurred between his birth and Herod's death, including the presentation at the temple 40 days after his birth, the visit of the Wise Men, the flight into Egypt, and the murder of the male children in Bethlehem. Whatever view is taken of the order of these events they can scarcely have occupied less than 2 or 3 months. Therefore the birth of Jesus took place no later than January of 4 B.C. or December 5 B.C., and it may have occurred up to 2 years earlier, although this is highly doubtful.

                          The custom of celebrating Jesus' birth on December 25th began in the 3rd or 4th century. It is questionable whether his birth was celebrated before that time, although we do know that the coming of the Wise Men was being celebrated on January 6 (Epiphany). The reason(s) for designating December 25th, as Jesus' birthday is not known.

                          Some argue that the date was chosen because it was the date for the pagan celebration Dies Solis Invicti (Day of the Invincible Sun). This celebration honored the sun god. If this were true, the reason(s) would have been (1) December 25th is within the reasonable window of dates (between Dec. 5 & Jan. of the year 4 B.C.); (2) it would have provided Christians an alternative festival in place of the one held in honor of the sun god, which was associated with the pagan Mithra religion.
                          Isaiah 7:14 "The Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel." This was no ordinary name, for this was no ordinary child. Immanuel means "God with us." Therefore the child's name signified who the child was; this child was "God with us."

                          We celebrate Christmas and the birth of Jesus because this day represents the promise and hope that God gave to all people on the face of the earth that day.

                          Why we celebrate Christmas on December 25th is not in the same category of the fictional story of Jesus creating life.
                          They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact, the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God. John 16:2

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by George View Post

                            Mary and Joseph were with Jesus as a child and would have used it in the New Testament. They did not.

                            We don't know when Jesus was born.

                            As to why we celebrate Christmas on December 25th:
                            The New Testament provides no precise information concerning the year of Jesus' birth. A fixed point from which to start is the fact that Jesus was born before the death of Herod the Great. According to Matthew 2:1-9, Herod was troubled by the arrival of the Wise Men asking where the king of the Jews had been born. From Josephus we learn that Herod died on or before Passover, A.U.C. 750 (that is, on or before April 4, 4 B.C.). How long before this date Jesus was born is not known. Matthew and Luke tell of certain events that occurred between his birth and Herod's death, including the presentation at the temple 40 days after his birth, the visit of the Wise Men, the flight into Egypt, and the murder of the male children in Bethlehem. Whatever view is taken of the order of these events they can scarcely have occupied less than 2 or 3 months. Therefore the birth of Jesus took place no later than January of 4 B.C. or December 5 B.C., and it may have occurred up to 2 years earlier, although this is highly doubtful.

                            The custom of celebrating Jesus' birth on December 25th began in the 3rd or 4th century. It is questionable whether his birth was celebrated before that time, although we do know that the coming of the Wise Men was being celebrated on January 6 (Epiphany). The reason(s) for designating December 25th, as Jesus' birthday is not known.

                            Some argue that the date was chosen because it was the date for the pagan celebration Dies Solis Invicti (Day of the Invincible Sun). This celebration honored the sun god. If this were true, the reason(s) would have been (1) December 25th is within the reasonable window of dates (between Dec. 5 & Jan. of the year 4 B.C.); (2) it would have provided Christians an alternative festival in place of the one held in honor of the sun god, which was associated with the pagan Mithra religion.
                            Isaiah 7:14 "The Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel." This was no ordinary name, for this was no ordinary child. Immanuel means "God with us." Therefore the child's name signified who the child was; this child was "God with us."

                            We celebrate Christmas and the birth of Jesus because this day represents the promise and hope that God gave to all people on the face of the earth that day.

                            Why we celebrate Christmas on December 25th is not in the same category of the fictional story of Jesus creating life.
                            You said the story of the young Jesus giving life to clay birds, as narrated in the Quran, is fiction simply on the basis of you believing Mary and Joseph would have mention it (and that would have been recorded in the gospels) as they were with him in those early years. That, however, is a very weak argument as I cannot recall Mary or Joseph mentioning Jesus giving life to anything or anyone in the gospels too. That, however, does not mean Jesus NEVER performed such miraculous feats. Logically speaking, if Jesus, with God’s Permission, can give life back to a dead man, then, a young Jesus, giving life to clay birds is NOT IMPOSSIBLE, but rather, very, very believable.

                            Moreover, we know Jesus performed many miraculous feats and clearly, the gospels alone cannot record each and every miracle that Jesus performed from his childhood days to his adulthood days. As the writer of the gospel of John put it – “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written” - John 21:25.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by JerryMyers View Post

                              You said the story of the young Jesus giving life to clay birds, as narrated in the Quran, is fiction simply on the basis of you believing Mary and Joseph would have mention it (and that would have been recorded in the gospels) as they were with him in those early years. That, however, is a very weak argument as I cannot recall Mary or Joseph mentioning Jesus giving life to anything or anyone in the gospels too. That, however, does not mean Jesus NEVER performed such miraculous feats. Logically speaking, if Jesus, with God’s Permission, can give life back to a dead man, then, a young Jesus, giving life to clay birds is NOT IMPOSSIBLE, but rather, very, very believable.

                              Moreover, we know Jesus performed many miraculous feats and clearly, the gospels alone cannot record each and every miracle that Jesus performed from his childhood days to his adulthood days. As the writer of the gospel of John put it – “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written” - John 21:25.
                              Maybe you should read the book this story comes from:

                              http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...a-roberts.html

                              Other than making clay birds that could fly, "Jesus" raised the dead:

                              " And some days after, Jesus was playing in an upper room of a certain house, and one of the children that were playing with Him fell down from the house, and was killed. And, when the other children saw this, they ran away, and Jesus alone stood still. And the parents of the dead child coming, reproached...and they threatened Him. And Jesus leaped down from the roof, and stood beside the body of the child, and cried with a loud voice, and said: Zeno-for that was his name-stand up, and tell me; did I throw thee down? And he stood up immediately, and said: Certainly not, my lord; thou didst not throw me down, but hast raised me up. And those that saw this were struck with astonishment. And the child's parents glorified God on account of the miracle that had happened, and adored Jesus."

                              The book makes "Jesus" out to be a modern day Dennis the Menace.





                              They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact, the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God. John 16:2

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by George View Post

                                Maybe you should read the book this story comes from:

                                http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...a-roberts.html

                                Other than making clay birds that could fly, "Jesus" raised the dead:

                                " And some days after, Jesus was playing in an upper room of a certain house, and one of the children that were playing with Him fell down from the house, and was killed. And, when the other children saw this, they ran away, and Jesus alone stood still. And the parents of the dead child coming, reproached...and they threatened Him. And Jesus leaped down from the roof, and stood beside the body of the child, and cried with a loud voice, and said: Zeno-for that was his name-stand up, and tell me; did I throw thee down? And he stood up immediately, and said: Certainly not, my lord; thou didst not throw me down, but hast raised me up. And those that saw this were struck with astonishment. And the child's parents glorified God on account of the miracle that had happened, and adored Jesus."

                                The book makes "Jesus" out to be a modern day Dennis the Menace.

                                The early Christian writings may have made Jesus another ‘Dennis the Menace’, but NOT the Quran.

                                Maybe you should know that the Quran ONLY said Jesus make birds from clay and, by God’s Permission, he breathed life into the clay birds (Quran 5:110). Nothing about Jesus playing in the upper room with other children or one of the children fell to his death, and so on. That could be the fiction from the early Christian writings. In other words, we can conclude the early Christian writings, like the Bible today, could also be a mixture of truth and lies, that is, fictions to spice up the story.

                                We do not know whether the story of Jesus playing in the upper room and one of the children falling to his death is true or not, BUT, we DO KNOW the Quran made NO MENTION of such story. Likewise, I could also just say the Titanic sank in the icy sea in April,1912, and nothing else. Can someone then said that’snot true because he believe what I said came from the movie ‘Titanic’ and there’s no such characters as played by DeCaprio and Kate Winslet, when the fact is, I have NOT said anything else other than that the Titanic sank in April, 1912 ?? Of course, NOT !

                                So, really, George, you need to know what the Quran said and what the Quran DID NOT say.

                                Fact is, as I said before, if Jesus, with God’s permission, can give life back to a dead man, then, a young Jesus, giving life to clay birds is NOT IMPOSSIBLE, but rather something very, very believable.

                                You think, with God’s Permission, Jesus is incapable to give life to clay birds ??

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X