Why the Difference of belief in Christianity?

Ibrahim · March 30, 2002, 2:28am

Ibrahim says: Dear Old man. thank you for the response and sorry I would not be able to agree with your assertion that God (FATHER, Father , father which BTW is all the same to me and any rational person) is a person and that there was a SON, Son, son ( same pronunciation) that is co equal to God.

Nevertheless for the purpose of this discussion I will accept that when you say father you mean God and when you say son you want to refer to Jesus (Altered name)

Having said that, let me refer you to the Holy spirit as it announced the creation of Christ to his mother.

Luke 1: 35. The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the ** “holy one to be born” will be called the Son of God. **

Hence my dear Old man, IF the holy one to be born was ** “the”** son of God, ** the angel will not be saying he will be called by others as son of God but will be saying he is son of God.**

This should be common sense but since you have been led to belief otherwise, based on other verses, let us explore them together at your own free will.

Ibrahim says :this is not possible simply because the Bible itself says so and I had quoted 12 verses earlier from the current edition of the bible that denies Christ being appointed as a second god with God.

Second Christ himself claims he has to go away in order for the sprit of truth to come, which means he is not the savior of mankind.

** In addition in the whole of the OT God keeps repeating He is God and in the NT, Christ NEVER once claimed he was God or son of God **

Ibrahim says: that is wonderful ** but was there a problem providing the details that you claimed existed in the Bible concerning the TRINITY??? **

I quote you previous claim

Ibrahim says; so now we are looking at Christ is God and not the trinity , right?

Ibrahim says: obviously you have forgotten I am Ibrahim, I can talk like a Christian , totally based on the bible when I want to by the Grace of God

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Ibrahim says: Oh well, the subject has changed but I like old man, so let me take him for a ride on my horse.

Firstly Jesus was not born according to the above verse of Isaiah. There are a few verses in the Book of Isaiah that may be alluded to Jesus Christ, but Isaiah 7:14 and 9:6 are not for Jesus.

Please read carefully the words of the Prophecy quoted by you.

Kindly read ** “and the government will be on his shoulders**

When in the world did Christ have a government or participated in uniting the Jews to establish that faith?? On the other hand the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did achieve this government and even today Muslims (1.8 billion strong) adhere to his laws and are trying to establish them as their governing laws.

Kindly read; ** “And His name shall be called…”**

Here are my questions to you;

Did the disciples and followers of Jesus, call him; Wonderful Counsellor ?

Let me quote original hebrew texts that will show us what “Wonderful counselor” will be pronounced as or would have been translated from.

Song of Solomon 5:16 xikow mamtaqiym wkulow ** maxamadiym ** zeh dowdiy wzeh ree`iy bnowt yruushaalaaim.

English translation : 16. His mouth is sweetness itself; he is ** altogether lovely**. This is my lover, this my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.

Ibrahim says: hence the wonderful counselor can only be translated to mean Mohammed in Hebrew, Arabic and Aramaic.

** It will NEVER translate to Jesus./Iesus or Eesa **

Second Did the disciples and followers of Jesus, call him; the Almighty God?

Ibrahim says this would amount to blasphemy, if anyone did that.

Third Did the disciples and followers of Jesus, call him; the Everlasting Father?

Ibrahim says: Imagine a man ( Christ) who worshiped the father declaring himself the ever lasting father!

There are no records of those callings in the Gospels. Hence, THIS prophecy is not for Jesus who was instead called; the “Son of God” or the “Christ of God”. When Peter was asked by Jesus; “But what do you say that I am?” Peter answered and said, “The Christ of God.” Luke 9:20.

John, the beloved disciple of Iesus, writes in the end part of his Gospel; ** “But these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ,** the Son of God…” John 20:31.

It is a known fact that Iesus, since that time is called “Christ Iesus” or the “Son of God”, by the Christians and the non-Christians.

FYI, Iesus was called the “Christ of God”, because the Almighty God had performed the act of sanctification or anointing and had made him Holy.

** The Eternal Almighty God, is Eternally HOLY and needs no Sanctification. ** Denial of the Gospel attestation that the Act of Anointing was performed by the God, would mean Jesus is NOT the “Christ of God”.

If Jesus is No More Christ, then the Christians are No More Christians.

Hot Tip:

         ** "No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other. You cannot serve God and Mammon."**  Matt. 6:24.

Ibrahim says; My dear old man, why have you failed to realize the words “In the beginning” in john 1:1 ??

You see God does not have a beginning, anything that has or had a beginning is a created thing and cannot be like God who had NO beginning , only the created has a beginning. Which will demolish your whole argument. But let me take you further.

The verse insinuates “Jesus was God from the beginning” because Christians have, for the last numerous generations, embraced the concept of SUBSTITUTING the word “Word” (of the Greek term `Logos’) with “Jesus”. John did not write “Jesus”. It is a SUBSTITUTION.
One can only SUBSTITUTE (of course with admissible logic), the original term IF the LITERAL translation of the used term fails to reconcile with the rest of the text. Unfortunately, as you will soon discover, the situation here is the other way around. .
Please read the last two lines from (a) with the SUBSTITUTION.

(Romanised Greek) John 1: 1. En archee een ho Logos, kai ho Logos een pros ton Theon, kai theos een ho Logos.

John 1:1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

It reads; “and Jesus was with God and Jesus was God.” ** How can “Jesus” be “with” God, and “was” God, as well? ** It defies the logic. The SUBSTITUTION has created an enigmatic dilemma to which the Christian scholars have yet to find an answer.

The norm of accepting the SUBSTITUTION has been so deep rooted that no believing Christian scholar has sincerely attempted to find out what in reality is the LITERAL translation. Let us do it together. The Greek term Logos' is derived from the root word Lego’ meaning to speak'. The literal translation of Logos’ is something spoken or thought'. The verification of the above translation is simple. Please pick up your English Dictionary and look for the word Decalogue’. Surprised! It reads; The Ten Commandments'. (deka=ten; logous=commands). Now please flip a few more pages of your dictionary and go to the word Logos’. Please look for the word origin. In my pocket `Oxford Dictionary’ it reads; “[Gk, = reason, discourse, (rarely) word].”
Having discovered the LITERAL translation of the word “Logos” used by apostle John, let us read (a):

In the beginning was the spoken word, command', and the spoken word, command’ was with God, and the `spoken word, command’ was Divine. (John 1:1)

The LITERAL translation is not only logical but it coincides perfectly with the prologue of the Book of Genesis. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the God said, Let there be light; and there was light.” (Genesis 1:1/ 3)

** “This (Command) was in the beginning with God”** John 1:2 "All things came into being by this ** (Command)** John 1:3

You may now ask, why did I translate “Divine” instead of “God” in the last line?. The answer is based upon the usage of Greek grammar. In the second line, the phrase used by John for “God” is ho theo', meaning the God’. In the last line it is simply theo', the definitive article the’ is not used. Why? Because, it is a predicate of the subject. The predicate is used to denote the nature, quality, attribute or property of the subject. Here in this instance the nature of the God’s spoken command was Divine.
In ‘New translation of the Bible’ (1922) by the famous ** Dr. James Moffatt, it reads; “the Logos was Divine.”** And, also in The Complete Bible - An American Translation' (Smith-Goodspeed) and The Authentic New Testament’ by Hugh J. Schonfield. Besides, in the translations done by; Haenchen, Lyder Brun and Madsen

In both the James Moffatt and Goodspeed translations of the bible, this point is rendered more clearly ** “the Word was divine.” “Divine” is definitely an adjective modifying the term “Word”. So the term “God” in the phrase “the Word is God” indicates the quality of the “Word”. **

Hot Tip:

    Paul wrote; "..** .if any man is preaching to you a Gospel contrary to which you received, let him be accursed (anathema)."**    Galatian 1:9.

The preaching of any SUBSTITUTED TEXT (which contradicts or is inconsistent with the literally translated text) is no different from the preaching of a CREATED TEXT. ** Was it difficult for John to write “Jesus” instead of “Logos”, if he so meant? **

Ibrahim says: My dear old man, the words worship means

worship

1 chiefly Brit : a person of importance — used as a title for various officials (as magistrates and some mayors)

2 :** reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; **also : an act of expressing such reverence

3 : a form of religious practice with its creed and ritual

4 : extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem

Hence , yes! I too worship Christ, meaning I revere him just like I revere all the Prophets including prophet Mohammed (peace be upon them all) . Will you now claim I am Christian because I did that?

Thus, I am sad to note that you have been misled due to adopting a translation and not looking at what the originals may have conveyed.

Lets look at this tradition of clasping the feet and worshipping a person. Ask any hindu women and she will tell you they have to do this with regards to their parents and husband and others that they adore as a mark of respect.

If you like I can quote the vedic verses that establish this tradition. What I am saying is that such acts does not amount to ritual worship as performed by Christ to God.

Ibrahim says. MY dear old man let me quote verse 14 from that same chapter as written by the author??? Of Colossians

Col 2: 14. ** having canceled the written code, with its regulations** , that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away,** nailing it to the cross.

This is an epistle written by Pual
Whereas the Gospel says as written by Matthew.

Matt 5:17. ** "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. **

I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear,** not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law ** until everything is accomplished.
** Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, ** but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Ibrahim says: My dear old man, ** will you reject the words of Christ and accept the words from an epistle (letter) by Paul of doubtful origins? **

Ibrahim says: again my dear old man, you have put your trust in the epistle and failed to realize the words in the Gospel.

Lets look at Titus

Titus 1: 4. ** To Titus, my true son in our common faith:** Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.

The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you.

Ibrahim says; this is Paul writing to his true son ( who is Greek???) and Paul NEVER met Christ in his life yet Paul claimed he was the appointed counselor/Sprit of truth(?) and went against the disciples of Christ.

So let us look at what Paul claimed ………

Galatians 1: 14. ** I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age** and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers.

But when God, ** who set me apart from birth** and called me by his grace, was pleased
** to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, **
nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was,** but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus. **
Then ** after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days.**

Ibrahim says: hence he made this audacious claim, that he was chosen from birth and after being chosen in a miracles event ( which is contradictory by his own words) he went to Arabia to perform hajj??? Or what would have been his purpose to go there immediately?

Then he claims ………….

Gal 2: 1. ** Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem,** this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also.

I went in response to a revelation ** and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles.** But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain.
** Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. **
[This matter arose] because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy ** on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. **
** We did not give in to them for a moment,** so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.
As for those who seemed to be important—** whatever they were makes no difference to me;** God does not judge by external appearance—** those men added nothing to my message.**

Ibrahim says: hence Paul was preaching his own gospel , which contradicted the teachings of the original disciples of Christ and he did not care but continued preaching his false teachings because it was meant for the gentiles, whereas the Jews could care less as gentiles were considered out castes in Judaism.

Lets look at the ever lasting covenant established by God, for the descendants of Abraham

Gen 17: 9. Then God said to Abraham, "As for you,** you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. **

This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: ** Every male among you shall be circumcised. **
** You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. **
For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner–those who are not your offspring.
Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant.
** Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."**

Ibrahim says yet here comes a person who claims he is well versed with Judaism ( above others in his age) and he declares you do not need to circumcise when Christ himself had to circumcise to establish this covenant enjoined on mankind.

Read again….Gal 2: 3. Paul said …** Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. **

Ibrahim says : My God!. Are you still having clouds in your mind, such that you cannot see what is I front of you old man???

Ibrahim says: when this is what you belief, why would there be a problem as to which is the word of God and which is not, since Christianity is still in turmoil as to which are its authentic books and which are not? Or are you saying the almighty allowed the protestants to have only 66 books whereas the Catholics ended up with 74 books constituting the Bible.?

Ibrahim says: Is that all?? And because of this, you believe he is God or son of God? Did you know we cannot see the angels and jinns and our famous shaitan/satan also can be seen as well as cannot be seen according to his tricks, will that make him a god or someone above Christ or a part of the trinity???

Ibrahim says: First the verse you quote has no bearing to the holy spirit as it refers to Christ.

Second which means if a person had life ( spirit in him) this sprit due to it being able to occupy the body is part of the trinity ( since it can do what God and Christ cannot do)???

Ibrahim says: My dear old man God has no form, so how can God have a reflection?? Just above you tried to argue that only Jesus can appear in a form of man and God cannot do this making him equal to God, now you say God had a reflection that looks like a man.

O dear, what has happened to your senses, are you not able to perceive what is meant by

Gen 1:2. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the ** Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.**

Ibrahim says: what waters, you mean the universe is actually water before the creation of the earth?

This account is due to Hindu understanding of creation which says everything was water and out of the golden egg came the earth and planets.

Check out where this understanding originates from………….

HINDUISM’S VIEW OF CREATION (VEDAS – SATAPATHA BRAHMANA)

In the beginning this universe was just water…and then an egg hatched:

** “Verily, in the beginning this (universe) was water, nothing but a sea of water. The waters desired, ‘How can we be reproduced?’** They toiled and became heated (with fervid devotion), when they were becoming heated, a golden egg was produced. The year, indeed, was not then in existence: this golden egg floated about for as long as the space of a year. In a year’s time a man, this Prajapati, was produced therefrom; and hence a woman, a cow, or a mare brings forth within the space of a year; for Prajapati was born in a year. He broke open this golden egg. There was then, indeed, no resting-place: only this golden egg, bearing him, floated about for as long as the space of a year.” – Satapatha Brahmana 11:1:6:1-2.

Dear old man, I assume you were actually trying to refer to

Gen 1: 26. Then God said, ** “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, ** and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

Ibrahim says: which still means you have a big problem and this has nothing to do with explaining the trinity that you claimed was so very visible in the Bible.

Thus it is entirely your choice as to what you chose to belief and what you chose to reject, on the other hand, you have not put forward any credible evidence for the trinity or Christ being God.

I hope you will do something to convince me, that you are on solid ground, at least I can extent a rope to pull you out of the quick sand that you seem to be in yet not realizing that you are STUCK in it.

Regards
Ibrahim

** to live in the present is wisdom. To live for the present is folly **

The_Old_Man · March 31, 2002, 1:04pm

Sholay:

[quote]
I still cannot see how the sonhood of Solomon has been explained. Old Man did try his best but unfortunately he did not answer the question.
[/quote]

It is written – “No-one is as blind as he who don’t want to see.” I don’t think you will EVER accept the deity of Jesus Christ. It is your prerogative as you are not of the Christian faith. Your view doesn’t change what Christians believe whatsoever….

[quote]
The reasoning he gave contradicts the actual verse, as the verse quite clearly states that Solomons kingdom will be establihed in Israel forever. Therefore the concept of everyone being God's children does not apply here as God has specifically stated that Solomon is one of 'the' sons! Furthermore, not every child of God establishes a kingdom for a specific set of people!!. Other unique Sons of God also include the following:
"I am a father to Israel and Ephraim is my firstborn"(Jeremiah 31:9), 'long before Jesus was born'.
"I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me [David], Thou art my son; this day have I begotten thee."(Psalm 2:7)
"Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God"(Luke3: 38).

[quote]
The first ever recording of the Bible came into existence 200 years after Jesus's parting from earth. Nothing was ever recorded during the lifetime of Jesus.
[/quote]

Let me correct you: “The first ever recording of some of the books in the * New Testament * part of the Bible came into existence approximately 100 years after Jesus parting from earth. Some of the books in the Old Testament was written more than 3000 years ago.”

[quote]
Christians cannot accept the Qur'aan because if they did, the whole concept of Trinity will collapse and no cleric on earth will be able to justify the misleading of masses for over 2000 years!
[/quote]

Christians cannot accept the Qu’ran as from God because it conflict with the teachings we have of Jesus Christ and those that spoke with him.

[quote]
Thirdly, if Jesus was God, why were his disciples never called a Prophet ?
[/quote]

Why should they be? Totally irrelevant argument.

[quote]
Fourthly, Did Jesus deny being God? Yes
[/quote]

None of the verses quoted has any bearing on whether Jesus said he was God or not – irrelevant. Why not try the following:

Jesus equating him to the Father/God;

Matt.28v19 * Therefore go and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit… * Taking him to be on the same level as the Father.

John.5v23 * Moreover, the Father judges no one, but ** has entrusted all judgement to the Son *, that * all may honour the Son just as they honour the Father **. * Him going to be the final judgement of good and wrong. He must get the same honour as God/Father.

John.16v15 * All that belongs to the Father is mine. * Can you/humans say that all of God belongs to you?

John.17v10-11 * All I have is yours, and all you have is mine. And glory has come to me through them. I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name – the name you gave me – ** so that they may be one as we are one **. * Can you/humans say that you are one with God?

Speaking of Abraham he used the words that God made himself known to Moses:

John.8v57-59 * “You are not yet fifty years old,” the Jews said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!” “I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “ ** before Abraham was born, I am! ** ” At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds. * Jesus could have said “I was” but choose to say “I am”. By using the words God used to Moses, the Jews knew he was equating himself to God and according to them, he was “blaspheming” and had to be stoned.

The Jews said that Jesus claimed to be God: John.19v7 * The Jews insisted, “We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.” *

He proclaimed to be the Christ/Messiah of the Jews. Matt.26v63-65 * But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.” “Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: In future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy. * According to the Jews Jesus equated himself with God by claiming to be God’s Son, not just a child of God as they claim in John.8v41, but a true part of God.

You will have to agree that if Jesus lived today in any of the Muslim countries and said what he said, he would also be condemned to death because of blasphemy.

[quote]
The easiest way to confirm the Truth is to quote the Qur'aan, but that would be way way way too easy!
[/quote]

Unfortunately the Qu’ran has no bearing on Christianity and it’s believes. You may quote the Qu’ran if you feel to strengthen your Muslim brothers/sisters faith though!

The_Old_Man · March 31, 2002, 1:10pm

Dear Ibrahim:

And the angle told Joseph : Matt.1v22 * “All this took place to fulfil what the Lord had said through the prophet: “The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Emmanuel” – which means, “God with us”. *

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Jesus had to go away for the Holy Spirit to come and be the Teacher as per John.16v7 and further.

John.3v16 * “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. * Are you condemned, dear Ibrahim? I know that I am not!

Matt.1v21 * She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins. *

Ibrahim, you am mistaken, to be able to quote the Bible does not make you a Christian or let you “talk like a Christian”. To believe that Jesus is the only way to salvation and to accept him as your Saviour, makes you a Christian. Even Satan quoted scripture

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Exactly why the Jews did not believe he was the Messiah. They expected an earthly government, same as you. Which government is better: an earthly one, or a government for eternity as what Jesus now has created. Luk.2v11-12 * Today in the town of David a Saviour has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in clothes and lying in a manger. *

Unfortunately Muhammad did not conform to the prophesy:

He was not called from birth but only started his calling later in life (Pardon me if you think I am showing disregard to your Prophet)
He most definitely is not called “Mighty God”
He is not called “Everlasting Father”
He does not reign on David’s throne – born of David’s lineage

His followers are calling Jesus Wonderful Councillor today, yes. If Jesus is part of the trinity, obvious the Names relating to God will also be His in God Almighty!

Nonsense, dear Ibrahim. The word in Songs is “machmâd” and pronounced phonetically makh-mawd’ from the root “châmad”. I think you refer to the word “machmûd” also written sometimes as “machmûwd” pronounced “makhmood” meaning “desired” or “valuable/pleasant thing”. The word used in Isa.8v6 is “yâ’ats” and pronounced “yaw-ats”. It doesn’t need to translate into Jesus as it is one of various names used to call the Messiah/Christ. It most certainly does not refer to a person called Mohammad.

They did call him God without being reprimanded! John.20v28 * Thomas answered, “My Lord and my God!” Then Jesus told him. “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” * “God in Greek is “theos” meaning “a deity’. When the word “o’ ” is used with it, it becomes “the supreme Divinity” meaning God Almighty.

[quote]
Did the disciples and followers of Jesus, call him; the Everlasting Father?

[quote]

If Jesus is one with the Father in God, surely when calling God “Father” he will be called Father at the same time. That’s why Jesus said he and the Father is one!

When reading * “The Word became flesh and lived among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth” *, there is no doubt “who” the “Word” refers to.

It can be true if you believe in the Trinity!!!

But a word can not live and be seen!

Unfortunately the author you pasted from, did not look at the original Greek. It reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with * theos * , and God was * ho * Word. The subject has the article and the predicate has it not; hence it is translated – “ the Word was God”. If you do not believe it is correctly translated any good Greek linguist will help you out!

Hindu practices are not under consideration here. It was not the practice of Jews to do this unless it is done to their Almighty God. They would only bow down and “worship’ the true and only God. The Greek word “worship” used in these and other places where Jesus was “worshipped” by followers, is “proskuneo” meaning “to prostate oneself in homage/worship”. It is used in instances such as:

Rev.7v11-12 * All the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshipped God, saying: “Amen! Praise and glory and wisdom and thanks and honour and power and strength be to our God for ever and ever. Amen!” *

Rev.11v16-17 * And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshipped God, sayng: “We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty, who is and who was…” *

Surely you do not want to say that in these instances God Almighty was not worshipped? The same word means in context the same meaning.

There is no conflict between what Jesus and Paul said.

Interesting Titus was not the son of Paul biologically but spiritually (Paul led him to Christ and taught him as a spiritual father). Paul met Christ on the road to Damascus Act.9v4-6! Paul never claimed he was the Spirit of Truth. Paul only went against those disciples when they were wrong – as he was supposed to do. The disciples were also human and had failing, same as Paul.

Arabia then included all the kingdom of Aretas from Damascus and east of Jordan down to Edom in the south. Petra was the capital. See Paul’s experience there in 2Cor.11v30-33. Christianity took hold here quite early on perhaps due to Paul himself. Chosen from birth? No problem there since one’s is chosen even before birth! Perform “hajj”? Have no idea what you are talking about since Paul doesn’t say as much. His immediately purpose was to get away to a place where the Jewish leaders could not get to him and where he would have time to speak and be taught by God, the disciples and other followers of Jesus Christ.

Not once was Paul taken to task of “preaching his own gospel” by any of the other disciples. In fact, all his teachings are collaborated by either the other disciples or Christ himself. Oh, but how you hate that Jew called Paul!

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

The circumcision was a sign between God and Abraham’s offspring as to covenant God made between Him and Abraham. Surely you understand the concept of covenant and blood? If not, I am willing to teach you. The Gentiles are not the offspring of Abraham. The whole earth is blessed through the covenant of God with Abraham as Jesus did come out of his lineage Gen.22v18 * and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed *. Christians do not need to be circumcised as determined by the council in Jerusalem ** where all the disciples were present ** Acts.15

You asked an example, I gave you one! Satan can’t be seen unless he take a body of some creature such as human/serpent ** because he has no body himself **.

Shame on you, Ibrahim! There are enough verses to state that the Holy Spirit of God can enter and take over a person. Just to comfort you, I will give you some scriptures: Judg.14v6 Num.27v18 Ezek.2v2 Matt.10v20 Acts.7v55 etc.

[This message has been edited by The Old Man (edited March 31, 2002).]

The_Old_Man · March 31, 2002, 1:22pm

Genesis 1 and 2 are one of the most interesting parts in the Bible/Torah. Since it makes statements about a time in humankind’s history of which they had no experience, one can infer that the account was given to the writer Moses as inspiration from God. It is not a step-by-step account of how everything was created but rather a summary with some distinct points. I will only enhance some of the interesting facts:

For starters, the first time that a word is used to denote God, the word is “Elohim” which is the plural from of “El”. Some people wish to state that it is due to the “kingly” way of talking about yourself in the plural form, but it is not. Moses, the author of the book Genesis uses the singular and plural forms of God together, Jehovah Elohim (or YHVH Elohim) where the word Jehovah is singular. Moses knew God by His singular and plural name. Moses knew God intimately, he spoke to Him face to face. He knew Him well enough to write down His name.

The terminology that is used in Genesis is very important. The Hebrew words for “make” is “bârâ” and “’âsâh” . “Bârâ” is used whenever something is made out of nothing, that is “created” while “âsâh” is used whenever something is “made out of” something already existing.

In Genesis 1 we find that the word “bârâ” is only used three times. All other times the word “âsâh” is used.

Gen.1v1 states that God Almighty made or “bârâ” the heaven and the earth. God “created out of nothing” the heaven and the earth. He gave “body” to the heaven and the earth or in other words He created the world of matter.
God continued to form what was then the universe by “making out of something already existing” or “âsâh”-ing the rest till he needed to create something totally new – Life.
The second time God “bârâ”/created was when He made the living creatures as per verse 20 to 21. * So God created ** (bârâ) ** … *. What God created was “life’ or natural life. All these “living creatures” had a body AND a soul.
The last time in Genesis that God * bârâ * was to create man. He now has created “spiritual life” by blowing his Spirit into His creation. Thus man differs from animals in that man has a body, soul AND spirit. Why was the spirit necessary? The spirit of God inside man will always call/reach to God as it is part of God. Demons can inhabit and control the body and mind/soul but not the spirit of man. When we die, the body is still called John, although the Soul and Spirit (also John) is somewhere else. In Psychology the parts of man is called Body, Ego, and Id. Interesting that the Bible made it known thousands of years ago!

The body is used to do all things physically as the Body of God, Jesus Christ, can be seen and be able to do the penalty for humankind as humankind can’t undo what Adam did.

The soul is the emotions/mind/intellect of man as the Father is the Soul of God.

The spirit of man is the will of man and equates to the Spirit of God which is not tied to one place and is possible to enter man in order to use man (willingly) for God’s purposes as well as to pull people to God in reverence.

Why is Jesus submissive to The Father? Our own bodies should be totally submissive to our soul/mind.

We are created the image of God and that is three-some: Body – Soul – Spirit. Looking at any one person you would only see one of the three. Nobody can see the soul or the spirit of a person same as nobody can see the Father or Spirit – and the mind can not contemplate all in one. When a person called John dies, and is buried, John the Soul/Spirit is not there anymore. We continue calling the corpse “John” though, although we know for a fact that the Soul/Spirit is somewhere else.

Gen.18 The Lord (in Hebrew Yehovah) appeared to Abraham. He saw 3 men and extended the normal courtesy to them by asking them in. He walked with them towards Sodom and one remained with him while two went on ahead. Abraham discussed the situation with the remaining Person. We read and see in verse 17: * Then the Lord (Yehovah) said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? * Abraham went on in discussing the situation as if the person standing with him is God Almighty (Yehovah). Finally we read in chapter 19v24: * The Lord (Yehovah) rained down burning sulphur on Sodom and Gomorrah – from the Lord (Yehovah) out of the heavens.* How and why could there be two Yehovahs, one walking the earth and another one in heavenly places? It must be one omnipresent Yehovah or Jesus Christ on earth and the Father in heaven. It all explain the plural use and way that God talks to Himself in Gen.1v26-27, Gen.2v22, Gen.11v7.

Zech.12v10 * “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of Grace, and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for [ib]him** as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.” * God is talking and switches between himself and Jesus Christ as if it is the same person.

Deut.6v4 * Hear, O Israel: The Lord (Yehovah) our God, the Lord (Yehovah) is one (echod). * In Hebrew, the word echod means not “absolute unity” but rather “composite unity”. The word is used to describe it when Adam and Eve became “one” flesh (bosor Echod), the cluster of grapes the spies brought back from Canaan (Eschol-Echod), when men of Israel was called to be “knit together as one man” (Ish Echod).

Luk.1v35 * The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High (Father) will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. *

And I can go on, and on, but I know I will not convince dear Ibrahim or Sholay as their religion completely contradicts what Christianity is all about. It is not a question of being intellectually convinced, but

*** Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believed. Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumblingblock to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength. ***

sholay · March 31, 2002, 7:58pm

Old Man

Unfortunately you still have not answered any of the questions, and are going around and around in circles!

Please stop beating about the bush.

Secondly, I am rather surprised that you state Christians do not accept the Qur'aan as the Word of God, when the fact is that the Qur'aan has been scrutinised by both Christian and Jewish Scholars who are much more learned than you and me, and have confirmed that the Qur'aan is the Word of God and a Miracle. Are they wrong or are they right!

That is why the 1400 year challenge still stands:

002.023 And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true.

002.024 But if ye cannot- and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones,- which is prepared for those who reject Faith.

010.037 This Qur’an is not such as can be produced by other than Allah; on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book - wherein there is no doubt - from the Lord of the worlds.

010.038 Or do they say, "He forged it"? say: "Bring then a Sura like unto it, and call(to your aid) anyone you can besides Allah, if it be ye speak the truth!"

017.088 Say: "If the whole of mankind and Jinns were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur’an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support.

Moving back onto the Bible, the Books collected into the New Testament do not constitute the utterances of Jesus nor of his disciples. Jesus was of Jewish ancestry and so were his disciples. If any of Jesus' utterances were to be found preserved in their original form, they could only be in the Hebrew language.

Same is the case with the utterances of his disciples. But no copy of the New Testament in ancient Hebrew exists in the world. The old copies are all in Greek.

The oldest manuscripts of the New Testament are in Greek. But in the time of Jesus, the Roman Empire had not become divided into two halves. The center of the Empire was still Rome. The Roman and Greek languages are very difficult. If Roman influence had at all penetrated Jewish life, it should have resulted in the assimilation of Latin (and not Greek) words into the Hebrew language. Yet the oldest manuscripts of the Gospels are all in Greek.

The Jewish scriptures states that God is not a Man :

"...say to the Prince of Tyre, Thus says the Lord GOD: Because your heart is lifted up, and you have said,"I am God, I sit at the seat of God, in the midst of the seas!"YET YOU ARE A MAN, AND NOT GOD..." ( Ezekiel 28:2-8: )

"Will you say before him that kills you, "I am God"? BUT YOU ARE A MAN AND NOT GOD ,in the hand of him who kills you.You shall die the deaths of the uncircumcised,by the hand of foreigners: for I have spoken it! " ( Ezekiel 28:9-10 )

God makes it quite clear to The Prince of Tyre that he is not God because he is a man . he is in fact saying " Prince of Tyre you say you are God yet your are not G-d BECAUSE YOU ARE A MAN . PRINCE OF TYRE = MAN = NOT GOD .

Finally, most Christians due to their dependence on Christian translations and commentaries of the Tenach are unaware of the vast body of scriptural evidence that exists revealing that the God of Abraham , Isaac and Jacob is not a man or any other created being . God through out the Tenach makes it quite clear that he's not a created being nor a composite unity of three persons in one as the Christians contend .

One of the reasons the Children of Israel to this day don't recognize Jesus as the Messiah or worship him as a "god man" is because the Tenach is filled with examples of God telling the Children of Israel not to worship strange gods or the image of any created thing , whether it be in the heavens or upon the earth it's not to be worshiped!

So I'm afriad Old Man you are once again LOST!

blitz · April 1, 2002, 5:53am

[quote]
Originally posted by sholay:
Secondly, I am rather surprised that you state Christians do not accept the Qur'aan as the Word of God, when the fact is that the Qur'aan has been scrutinised by both Christian and Jewish Scholars who are much more learned than you and me, and have confirmed that the Qur'aan is the Word of God and a Miracle. Are they wrong or are they right!

**
[/quote]

Christians DO NOT accept the Quran as the Word of God. PERIOD

If those "so-called" Christian and Jewish scholars you have mentioned have "confirmed" that the Quran is the word of God, and a Miracle, would not they be Muslim??

Some statements about the Quran by (muslim??) scholars.

Shabir Ally:

"It doesn't matter if the Qur'anic manuscripts are corrupted, or have evolved, as long as we have a picture of the true Jesus..." (Televised Debate in Atlanta, Oct. 19, 2000)
(What exactly does he mean? Is he willing to accept a false testemony?? )

Ibn Khaldun:
"Arabic writing at the beginning of Islam was, therefore, not of the best quality nor of the greatest accuracy and excellence. It was not (even) of medium quality, because the Arabs possessed the savage desert attitude and were not familiar with crafts.
One may compare what happened to the orthography of the Qur’an on account of this situation. The men around Muhammad wrote the Qur’an in their own script which, was not of a firmly established, good quality. Most of the letters were in contradiction to the orthography required by persons versed in the craft of writing.... Consequently, (the Qur’anic orthography of the men around Muhammad was followed and became established, and the scholars acquainted with it have called attention to passages where (this is noticeable).
No attention should be paid in this connection with those incompetent (scholars) that (the men around Muhammad) knew well the art of writing and that the alleged discrepancies between their writing and the principles of orthography are not discrepancies, as has been alleged, but have a reason. For instance, they explain the addition of the alif in la ‘adhbahannahU "I shall indeed slaughter him" as indication that the slaughtering did not take place ( lA ‘adhbahannahU ). The addition of the ya in bi-ayydin "with hands (power)," they explain as an indication that the divine power is perfect. There are similar things based on nothing but purely arbitrary assumptions. The only reason that caused them to (assume such things) is their belief that (their explanations) would free the men around Muhammad from the suspicion of deficiency, in the sense that they were not able to write well. They think that good writing is perfection. Thus, they do not admit the fact that the men around Muhammad were deficient in writing." (Muqqadimah, ibn Khaldun, vol. 2, p.382).

M. Hamidullah:
"Lastly I must bring into relief the case of the word "la", which in four or five cases is only " l " without the final alif.The word "la" means no, and the word " l " means certainly. It is horrible to think when it is meant "the believers certainly shall assemble unto God" and "the unbelievers certainly shall assemble in the hell", and the unfortunate ignorant reader unintentionally says "not" instead of "certainly". (Orthographical Peculiarities In The Text Of The Qur’an, M. Hamidullah, Islamic Order (Karachi), Vol. 3, no. 4, 1981, p.78; article received from Islamic Foundation U.K. as per citation in Ulum al-Qur’an, p.60; emphasis added).

Ibn Khallikan:
"Abu Amr states that he received the following revelation from Katada as-Sadusi: "When the first copy of the Qur’an was written out and presented to [the khalif] Othman Ibn Affan, he said: ‘There are faults of language in it, and let the Arabs of the desert rectify them with their tongues." (Biographical Dictionary, Ibn Khallikan, p. 401)

Miracle??

[This message has been edited by blitz (edited April 01, 2002).]

sholay · April 1, 2002, 8:16am

Blitz

You have hit the nail on the head! The reason why you and your clerics have not converted into Islam is quoted in the Qur'aan:

015.014 Even if We opened out to them a gate from heaven, and they were to continue (all day) ascending therein,

015.015 They would only say: "Our eyes have been intoxicated: Nay, we have been bewitched by sorcery."

It must be stressed here that the Qur'an is accurate about many, many things, but accuracy does not necessarily mean that a book is a divine revelation. In fact, accuracy is only one of the criteria for divine revelations. For instance, the telephone book is accurate, but that does not mean that it is divinely revealed. The real problem lies in that one must establish some proof of the source the Qur'an's information. The emphasis is in the other direction, in that the burden of proof is on the reader. One cannot simply deny the Qur'an's authenticity without sufficient proof. If, indeed, one finds a mistake, then he has the right to disqualify it. This is exactly what the Qur'an encourages.

An essential fact that cannot be reiterated enough concerning the authenticity of the Qur'an is that one's inability to explain a phenomenon himself does not require his acceptance of the phenomenon's existence or another person's explanation of it. Specifically, just because one cannot explain something does not mean that one has to accept someone else's explanation. However, the person's refusal of other explanations reverts the burden of proof back on himself to find a feasible answer. This general theory applies to numerous concepts in life, but fits most wonderfully with the Qur'anic challenge, for it creates a difficulty for one who says, "I do not believe it." At the onset of refusal one immediately has an obligation to find an explanation himself if he feels others' answers are inadequate.

So Blitz, please be kind enough to give your information!

The real certainty about the truthfulness of the Qur'an is evident in the confidence which is prevalent throughout it; and this confidence comes from a different approach - "Exhausting the alternatives." In essence, the Qur'an states, "This book is a divine revelation; if you do not believe that, then what is it?" In other words, the reader is challenged to come up with some other explanation.

It says it is a divine revelation; if it is not, then what is its source? The interesting fact is that no one has yet come up with an explanation that works. In fact, all alternatives have bee exhausted. As has been well established by non-Muslims, these alternatives basically are reduced to two mutually exclusive schools of thought, insisting on one or the other.

On one hand, there exists a large group of people who have researched the Qur'an for hundreds of years and who claim, "One thing we know for sure - that man, Muhammad (s), thought he was a prophet. He was crazy!" They are convinced that Muhammad (s) was fooled somehow. Then on the other hand, there is a group which alleges, "Because of this evidence, one thing we know for sure is that that man, Muhammad (s) was a liar!" Ironically, these two groups never seem to get together without contradicting.

There is a name for this in psychology. It is referred to as mythomania. It means simply that one tells lies and then believes them. This is what the non-Muslims say Muhammad (s) suffered from. But the only problem with this proposal is that one suffering from mythomania absolutely cannot deal with any facts, and yet the whole Qur'an is based entirely upon facts. Everything contained in it can be researched and established as true. Since facts are such a problem for a mythomaniac, when a psychologist tries to treat one suffering from that condition, he continually confronts him with facts.

The Qur'an is a problem for the Church. It states that it is revelation, so they study it. Certainly, they would love to find proof that it is not, but they cannot. They cannot find a viable explanation. But at least they are honest in their research and do not accept the first unsubstantiated interpretation which comes along. The Church states that in fourteen centuries it has not yet been presented a sensible explanation. At least it admits that the Qur'an is not an easy subject to dismiss. Certainly, other people are much less honest. They quickly say, "Oh, the Qur'an came from here. The Qur'an came from there." And they do not even examine the credibility of what they are stating most of the time.

Finally, my dear Blitz, if the book is not a revelation, then it is a deception; and if it is a deception, one must ask, "What is its origin? And where does it deceive us?"

Indeed, the true answers to these questions shed light on the Qur'an's authenticity and silence the bitter unsubstantiated claims of the unbelievers.

Certainly, if people are going to insist that the Qur'an is a deception, then they must bring forth evidence to support such a claim. The burden of proof is on them, not us!

So at least be brave enough to take on the challenge of the Qur'aan and produce at least 4 short sentences!!

I'm sure you can do something in 4 days which your colleagues have not been able to do for 1400 years!!!

Very brave and learned indeed.

The_Old_Man · April 1, 2002, 6:55pm

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Well, I understand that sometimes certain things are just too hard to comprehend especially if one has been brought up to believe otherwise, no matter how good the teacher! Don’t feel bad, Sholay. I don’t give myself out as a good teacher and will in this case accept that the fault lay with me. See you on other topics.

Please be so kind to give the names and background of these scholars. BTW, don’t underestimate my scholarly background when it comes to Christianity - you might be surprised as to what my status/background is!

Anyway, I have no problem with you believing that the Qu’ran is inspired and the only scripture to follow as to religion. I have NEVER writen anything detrimental/blasphemous about the Qu’ran or Islam on this board and do not intend to start now. I have too much respect for friends of mine of the Muslim faith. Please respect my own personal choice to rather take the Bible and the Holy Spirit as my personal guide through life.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Latin was the language of politics, law and government. Greek was the language of poets, philosophers, and religion. Greek as language is a much “nicer” language to express yourself in. Many wealthy Roman people send their children away to study Greek if they could not get a personal tutor. Just show how much you know of the era!

The Prince of Tyre, for your information, is Satan. Verse 13 states he was in Eden - only Adam, Eve, Satan and God was there. Verse 14 state he was a “guardian angel”. Verse 15 states he was perfect when made - Satan was originally perfect.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/rolleyes.gif

BTW: Are the references given by “blitz” true? I see that you refrained to answer him. Please ignore this request if you feel it would be blasphemous or inappropriate. My purpose for asking this is merely for my own curiosity and I can live without an answer if your answer will draw slanderous/blasphemous replies from certain Guppies.

[This message has been edited by The Old Man (edited April 01, 2002).]

blitz · April 2, 2002, 2:24am

[quote]
Originally posted by sholay:
**
Blitz

You have hit the nail on the head! The reason why you and your clerics have not converted into Islam is quoted in the Qur'aan:
**
[/quote]

sholay
I am sorry but I can only speak for myself and not the clerics. lol
If you read below, (Don't just scroll down, Please read!)you will understand why I don't have any reason to convert to another faith, when the one I am in right now gaurantees me Eternal Life.......... Can you say the same about yours Brother sholay??

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. John 14:6

Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Mathew 7:14-16

For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.
2Corinthians 11:4

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:8-9

[quote]
Originally posted by sholay:
**
An essential fact that cannot be reiterated enough concerning the authenticity of the Qur'an is that one's inability to explain a phenomenon himself does not require his acceptance of the phenomenon's existence or another person's explanation of it. Specifically, just because one cannot explain something does not mean that one has to accept someone else's explanation. However, the person's refusal of other explanations reverts the burden of proof back on himself to find a feasible answer.

**
[/quote]

The same can be said about truths of the Christian faith.

[quote]
Originally posted by sholay:
**
So Blitz, please be kind enough to give your information!
**
[/quote]

Read "Sources of Islam" by W. St. Clair-Tisdall.

I do not wish to offend any Muslim brother here, If I have done so I apologise.

Peace & Love!

Ibrahim · April 2, 2002, 3:53am

Ibrahim says: Greetings of peace to one and all

Dear old man, I am on the road and will soon be away in a number of countries as such do not expect quick responses as I am normally prone to do. My next reply may take a few weeks, ** God willing** , so kindly just reply and wait it out.

** But do something for Gods sake,**

Either establish the trinity ( Father , Son and Holy spirit are ONE)
Or establish Christ is God ( Jesus is the Creator)
or establish Christ is the one and only son of God
holy spirit is God, or a part of God too!

Not just mingle unfounded claims around without any credible proofs/verses from the Bible for them.

** Thanks**

Sorry for the delay in my reply, since I am trying my best to allocate some time for this and my replies have to be clear and credible.

Ibrahim says

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/biggrin.gif

ear Old man, can you tell us when Jesus ( altered name) was ever called “Immanuel” ( Isaiah 7:14) in the Bible or by any of his disciples or jews at large?

At the same time wonder why this name “Immanuel” is appearing here in Isaiah 8:

And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, ** O Immanuel.**
Associate yourselves, O ye people, and ye shall be broken in pieces; and give ear, all ye of far countries: gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces.
Take counsel together, and it shall come to nought; speak the word, and it shall not stand: for God is with us ( Immanuel) .

Ibrahim says : Old man, If someone had to go away, then they have no choice, but are being told to go. get it? And if someone else will be sent then that too is not their choice but the will of God, Thus it is obvious, Christ will be replaced by another Counselor ( spirit of truth) whom God had chosen and neither will he be the savior, because it is God alone who is the savior

Read.

Isaiah 43:3. For I am the LORD, your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior; I give Egypt for your ransom, Cush and Seba in your stead.

43: 11. I, even I, am the LORD, ** and apart from me there is no savior.**

Ibrahim says: Old man, apparently you want to put your bet on John 3:16 without fully understanding other verses in the Bible. For your Info only the Muslims believe in Christ as taught by Christ and those who call themselves Christians fall well short of what was taught by him, as such even though you seem to feel you believe in Christ, you do not do the things he said or did whereas Muslims do every thing that he practiced and taught in addition to having faith in all the Prophets including Christ.

** Muslims believe in Eesa (pbuh) (better known by his false name Jesus by Christians) was a “Messiah”; “Spirit from God”; “Word of God”; “the righteous Prophet” as well as “the Messenger of God” and “the son of Virgin Mary”. But, we do not believe Jesus was “the begotten son of God.” Or the one and only son of God**

Now let us examine John 3:16 , the issue here is,** is Christ the son of God as this verse seems to imply? **

Obviously if Christ was the son of God, God will have no problem telling us as such and Christ will have no problem announcing as such.
God will not be confusing mankind as to the number of sons He has.

the easiest way to solve this is to understand the following verses. In the Torah :

(Chronicles 17:13)

(The following verse is G-d talking to David about Solomon)" ** I will be His Father and he will be my son.** I will never take my love away from him, as I took it away from your predecessor.

(Hosea 1:10)

Yet the Israelites will be like the sand on the seashore, which can not be measured or counted. In the place where it is said to them, ‘You are not my people,’ ** they will be called 'sons of the living God. **

The kings of Israel are referred to as sons of God because they are to be His representatives, ruling in his place on earth over His people.

(Psalm 82:6 )

“I said, You are Elokim; ** you are all sons of the Most High” **

In conclusion, we see that Jesus only said a phrase that was commonly said by Jews in his days, and ** Jesus did not claim to have a monopoly on son-ship with God.** We are all God’s children, Jesus is not the only one and never claimed to be the Begotten one.

** Hot Tip:** (precise and pertinent)

Jesus said to Mary; “…go to my brethren, and say to them, ** I ascend to my Father and your Father…” ** (John 20:17).

This verse demonstrates that ** the usage of term `Father’ by Jesus was not in a physical sense but was purely metaphorical for the Creator. **

** As for Jesus being a “unique son”, he, unlike us, was created by the Creator without a physical Father. **

Ibrahim says: Old man , first this is a dream which contradicts the truth, since this version that had been added into the Bible by Matthew (?) contradicts and diminished the virgin birth, which is a miracle and sign for mankind.

The sign for mankind was a virgin will give birth and this has been accepted by Muslims, whereas the story about Joseph covering up this sign for mankind (by adding in the dream Joseph had ( Matt 1:21) and Matt:1: 16. * and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.* PLUS, Luke 3:23. Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli, ) ** and yet insisting it was a virgin birth is rather silly.**

Now, when a virgin gives birth she needs to prove that she was a virgin and she gave birth without anyone having touched her, failing which no one will believe she was a virgin,** this is common sense** … If it was not required to be a virgin birth, then it will not be a sign for mankind and Isaiah 7:14 will have no validity as is used by Christians) so now ask yourself, where in the Bible does she established that fact, the virgin birth was the sign that man had awaited for at that time frame ( since that part is missing, the dream Joseph supposedly had, is conveniently added into the Gospel, for the purpose of establishing Christian belief)

** Mind you, anyone who claims she is a virgin with a baby in hand will be stoned to death at those times or even today she will be proven a liar and brushed aside as a lunatic. **

so , the truth of the matter, ** can only be proven when you read the Qur’an and understand the first miracle of Christ, was that he TALKED and only by the baby talking and revealing the truth, he was able to establish that she was a virgin** and save her from the ordeal of certain death.

** Most of all, establishing that fact he was indeed the awaited sign ( Isaiah 7:14) for mankind and that his mother was indeed a virgin**

Second when one says he will save his people from their sins, does it mean he will be their savior as God is?

Or does it mean that he will be light of the world (guide them to avoid sinning) as long as he is present amongst them, just like all other prophets and messengers sent by God?

** Old man, you need to THINK, not just follow others blindly! **

Ibrahim says Old man, you did not answer my question but instead you keep claiming Christ is the savior and you point to Luke…. which was written by Luke because Luke believed that he need to write such things, just like you needed to believe in trinity without any evidence for them in order to keep your faith..

Read!

Luke

** Many have undertaken to draw up an account** of the things that have been fulfilled among us,
just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.
** Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning,** it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,
so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

Now just so that you can be sure how accurate this investigation by Luke is

Compare Matthew’s Gospel with Luke’s Gospel

Asks yourself this question ** Jesus descended from which son of David? **

(a) Solomon (Matthew 1:6)

(b) Nathan(Luke 3:31)

** Shall we flick a coin old man and guess about it or shall we just declare one of them must be right or both of them are wrong? **

Compare the entire genealogy given by Matthew and Luke and you will see how contradictory they are.

Ibrahim says: that is your opinion based on the subsequent verses which may be a corruption that got added into the bible

Ibrahim says: Old man, when a book has been corrupted many things can have been added, erased, omitted or mistranslated as such, this same argument you try to present, does not stand for Christ either, thus making some verses a fabrication at best.

Ibrahim says : Don’t be silly old man, grow up and get real, when the Bible says he will be called then he must be called not by people who will come 2000 years ( after reading it in the bible) later but by people who were present with him.

Ibrahim says: ** IF old man, IF???, you will argue on the basis of “IF” and you earlier claimed there was CLEAR verses in the bible for this trinity ** , don’t tell me you lied for the sake of your belief??? When questioned you switched it to Christ is God and no it seems to be Christ is son of God, man, which is which??? Is he God, son of God a part of God, what will it be? all three? .,. evidence from the bible please!

Ibrahim says: Old man you need to explore Jewish and Christian misconceptions and deceptions a lot closer, then you will understand why, when you can be sincere in your research maybe God will guide you to understand them. .

Ibrahim says: hold your horses! Where are you heading now??

Isaiah 8:6 yaan kiy maa'ac haaaam hazeh 'eet meey hashiloxa haholkiym l’aT uumsows 'et-rtsiyn uuben-rmalyaahuu.

Now tell us what has this To do with what you are saying?

Isaiah 8:6 "Because this people has rejected the gently flowing waters of Shiloah and rejoices over Rezin and the son of Remaliah,

Ibrahim says: Old man try to think!, when some one sees something and exclaims my lord my God! , it is an exclamation of seeing something they did not expect to see as is the case of this verse. It did not mean Christ was God, that is silly, if Christ was god Christ will not be worshipping God and cry…. Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"–which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

Ibrahim says: Old man, this nonsense about what is used for god in Greek can by very funny when you do some research, so let me give you the works on the Greek word play for God and god in the bible.

John 1:1 & 2 Theon = God
theos = god…(being disputed by some denominations)
Acts 7:43 Theou = god
Acts 12:22 Theou = god
Acts 12:23 Theoo = God
Acts 17:23 THEOO = god
Acts 28:6 theon = god
1 Cor 8:5 Theoi = gods
2 Cor 4:4 Theos = god
Theou = God
Philip 3:19 Theos = god
2 Tim 1:7 Theos = god
Titus 1:1 Theou = God
Heb 12:28 Theoo = God
12:29 Theos = God

Ibrahim says; Nonsense old man, lets examine the texts………..

John 10: 30.(Romanised Greek):- Egoo kai ho Pateer hen esmen.

In Greek, ‘heis’ means ‘one’ numerically (masc.) ‘hen’ means ‘one’ in unity or essence (neut.) Here the word used by John is ‘hen’ and not ‘heis’. The marginal notes in New American Standard Bible (NASB) reads; one - (Lit. neuter) a unity, or, one essence.

If one wants to argue that the word ‘hen’ supports their claim for Jesus being “co-equal” in status with his Father, please invite that person’s attention to the following verse:

John 17:11. Kai ouketi eimi en too kosmoo, kai autoi en too kosmoo eisin, kagoo pros se erchomai. Pater Hagie, teereeson autous en too onomati sou hoo dedookas moi, hina oosin ** hen** kathoos heemeis

John 17: 21. hina pantes ** hen ** oosin, kathoos su, Pater, en emoi kagoo en soi, hina kai autoi en heemin * oosin, hina ho kosmos pisteuee hoti su me apesteilas.
22. Kagoo teen doxan heen dedookas moi dedooka autois, hina oosin ** hen** kathoos heemeis hen.
23. Egoo en autois kai su en emoi, hina oosin teteleioomenoi eis ** hen,** hina ginooskee ho kosmos hoti su me apesteilas kai eegapeesas autous kathoos eme eegapeesas.

** Jesus said: “And the glory which Thou hast given me, I have given to them (disciples); that they may be one, just as we are one.”** (Jn 17:22). Here also the Greek word used is ‘hen’.

If any one was to consider / regard / believe the Father and Jesus Christ to be “one” meaning “co-equal” in status on the basis of John 10:30, ** then that person should also be prepared to consider / regard / believe “them” - the disciples of Jesus, to be “co-equal” in status with the Father and Jesus (“just as we are one”) in John 17:22.** I don’t think that individual would be prepared to make the disciples (students) “co-equal” in status with the Father or Jesus.

The unity was of the authorized divine message that originated from the Father, given to Jesus as His messenger and finally passed on by Jesus to his disciples. Jesus admitted having accomplished the work which the Father had given him to do. (Jn. 17:4)

** Hot Tip: ** (precise and pertinent)

Jesus said: ** “I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.” ** (Jn. 14:28). This verse unequivocally refutes the claim of Jesus being “co-equal” in status with his Father.

Note:

     If one wants to argue that the word "greater" does not necessarily  mean being greater or better in authority or status.  Please invite that persons attention to

John 13: 16. I tell you the truth,** no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.**

John 8 : 40. As it is, ** you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. ** Abraham did not do such things.:

Luke 4: 17. The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:

** "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor.** He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor."
Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him,
and he began by saying to them, ** “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”**

Ibrahim says: Old man, you snip out what you cannot handle but insist the word became flesh, was there an argument on this issue?

** I made it clear to you anything and anyone which had a beginning cannot be God, do you dispute this? **

Ibrahim says: what a naive notion! Sure I can also believe the cow jumped over the moon to declare the cow is divine like the Hindus do, are you that crazy old man?

Ibrahim says: Nonsense old man.

Read how the word became light, when God uttered it and how without “light” you cannot see.

Read.

Genesis 1: 3. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.

Ibrahim says: Old man, get real

Here read…..

John 1:1 En archee een ho Logos, kai ho Logos een pros ton Theon, kai ** theos** een ho Logos.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was god.

Ho means “the” not word , logos means “word”. Get help old man, you seem to persistently delude yourself.

So either you are misguided or you have decided to mislead others willfully.

Ibrahim says: can you tell us where the disciple bowed down ( fell on their heads) and worshiped Christ in the bible??

Ibrahim says: the confusion is due to the Greek manuscript ( currently considered the original for the Bible) being a translation and not an ORIGINAL as used by the Jews which can only be in Hebrew and Aramaic and none other. This can clearly be established by the word used for father (Abba in Aramaic) which the scribes must have altered from the word ** Alla** as used by the Jews and the disciples at the time of Christ before the Greeks altered it to ** Abba** and translated it into father.

Ibrahim says : nonsense! I just gave you the proof and you snipped it off to make a naive statement like this???

Ibrahim says: In other words people can call any other person they like, (a true son), without them being the paternal father, which is the case of Christ and God, get it??? If you won’t accept this, then this proves Paul to be a Liar.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Ibrahim says Yup , indeed Paul met something according to him, so read his three versions of his miraculous appointment which contradicts each other.

Read….2Cor 11:1 and 11:16-18, compare with Gal 1:17 and 4:13, compare with 2 Tim 2:8.

Ibrahim says : then why have you been misled by him blindly when he has gone against Christ’s teachings and Christ’s prophesy ??

Ibrahim says: Old man, If Christ chose his disciple amongst many a man and spend years with them, guiding them about all matters concerning correct worship and behaviors and suddenly a man who hated Christ , had a sudden heat stroke and starts claiming he is Christ and what the disciples taught is in error , who will you believe??

Now I am not trying to claim I know better, but read what Paul is claiming.

Lets Read!

1 Cor 9: 19. Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, ** to win as many as possible. **
20. To the Jews I became like a Jew, ** to win the Jews** . To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as ** to win those under the law. **
21. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as ** to win those not having the law. **
22. To the weak I became weak, ** to win the weak. ** I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.
23. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.
24. Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? ** Run in such a way as to get the prize.**

Ibrahim says: Meaning he will do anything to get people to accept him and the final goal was the ** money that all these people coughed up** by hearing to his words of deception.

Ibrahim says : Old man, I asked why he went to Arabia immediately and why not to Jerusalem since that is where he studied and that is where Christs mother and other disciples and priests lived…get it? If Christ had suddenly changed his mind and included the gentiles in his guidance, it would have been imparted to the disciples but the disciples had no such understanding, the teachings Paul introduced was tailored for the gentiles and not for the Jews ..get it? Whereas Christ was sent to the Jews…get it?

Ibrahim says: so Paul was chosen before birth to preach on behalf of Christ after Christ?

Ibrahim says LoL!. get a life old man can you tell me where Paul said this? You mean God killed his only son and found Paul who was able to do a better job in such short time and the Jews had no reason to kill him, if they were actually teaching the same stuff?

Ibrahim says: why would the other disciples bother or how are they going to proof that Paul was making false claims ( his miraculous appointment) when his concentration was on the gentiles away from Jerusalem and not on the Jews?

Ibrahim says Old man, don’t be naïve, this man claimed the laws were abolished , whereas Christ claimed he came to fulfill ALL of them (laws) , so go figure it out while you still have a life in you. For your own sake.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Ibrahim says: Old man do you understand what is an everlasting covenant for believers, do you know why Muslims circumcise even though nothing of it is commanded in the Qur’an?

Ibrahim says: Old man, do you understand what it means when God said he created Adam and eve and from them sprang the rest of mankind???

Ibrahim says: man you seem to be all so bent on following misconceived notions. The disciple agreed to let the gentile follow such teachings as Christ NEVER authorized their involvement in Judaism. What this meant was to allow the unbelievers (gentiles) to adopt some of their ways and not be strict on them so the eventually they can be guided to become true Jews as taught by Christ.

The disciples had no such command and Christ himself was only sent to correct the Jews, this is fundamental because the Jews were the core of the faith, since the core was corrupted, the core had to be corrected and redirected , not the rest who are yet to understand why the scriptures revealed to prophet Ibrahim (pbuh) had to be abolished and reestablished with the Israelites.

Lets Read!

Matt 7: 6. "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

Matthew 15:

A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession.”
Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”
** He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” **
The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
** He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs.” **
“Yes, Lord,” she said, “but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.”
Then Jesus answered, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

Ibrahim says : old man stop squirming and provide all the details for your claims , your claim was, “Christ was God, part of trinity” , because he can do what the father cannot do, so put forward your proof and be honest about it.

Ibrahim says: nonsense, the Satan deceives by creating illusions, ( magic) so Satan can appear in any form in addition to possessing other forms.

Ibrahim says: Old man, shame on you for trying to twist this into something else, since you claimed, because the holy spirit can occupy others ( which God and Christ cannot do) , it is part of the trinity. Which I countered by saying every spirit/soul that God created occupies a body to function as a human being, that does not make the “spirit” a part of the trinity or equal to God. Now if you can proof otherwise , I will be happy to proof you wrong.

Ibrahim says: ** which still means you have a big problem and this has nothing to do with explaining the trinity that you claimed was so very visible in the Bible.**

Thus it is entirely your choice as to what you chose to belief and what you chose to reject, on the other hand, ** you have not put forward any credible evidence for the trinity or Christ being God. Or Christ being the son of God which you seem to play around, without establishing any one of it in this thread. **

I hope you will do something to convince me, that you are on solid ground, at least I can extent a rope to pull you out of the quick sand that you seem to be in, yet not realizing that you are STUCK in it.

Regards
Ibrahim

** Three big consumers of energy; guilt, fear and unfulfilled expectations **

Arshia84 · April 11, 2002, 4:21pm

RE: Postration

To who ever said postartion was showing off form of worship..........

How'd you figure that one out????? Muslims postrate everyday when they pray, wheather its alone or in congregation.....Are u trying to suggest we show off???

I think its just an excuse for you not postrate beacuse either you can't be bothered, or don't believe in postrating or some other reason.