Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
iec786
Senior Member
Joined: 06 February 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 508
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 June 2012 at 11:26pm |
Deedat's book�defends the "swoon" theory of the crucifixion, which states in brief:
�
Jesus was crucified on the cross.
He sufferred and became unconscious.
The Roman soldiers thought he was dead.
He was buried in a tomb.
Then his disciples came and resuscitated him.
I don't see how Deedat's theory can be reconciled with what is written in the koran.� And Deedat certainly didn't accept the theory that Judas was crucified in place of Jesus. [/QUOTE]
That swoon was in the Bible and that is what he was quoting the Bible not his own words.please do not put words in peoples mouth.
|
|
iec786
Senior Member
Joined: 06 February 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 508
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 June 2012 at 11:28pm |
Reepicheep wrote:
iec786 wrote: Judas the traitor was crucified in the place Jesus.If you read the book you would have known this... I strongly suggest you take time out and read the book.
�iec786 also wrote: Deedat never worked with theory he worked with facts.
�
You seem to be saying that Deedat was telling the truth when he claimed that it WAS Jesus who was arrested by the Romans, put on trial, sentenced to death, put on the cross, declared dead, put into the tomb, and later revived.� Correct?
�
But, in your previous post, you stated that it wasn't Jesus but instead Judas who was crucified.
�
How can both these beliefs be true?� They contradict each other. |
Deedat did not claim the anything he was quoting what the Bible said jeez how do you read a book.
|
|
Reepicheep
Senior Member
Joined: 06 November 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 324
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 June 2012 at 7:22am |
Well, iec786, since you continue to make false claims about the contents of Deedat's book, I see little point in continuing this discussion.
The only muslim sect that considers the swoon theory to be true is the Ahmadiyyas. I've never understood why so many Sunni muslims consider Deedat to be a great scholar, when his writings not only contradict Sunni beliefs, they also contradict the koran.
|
|
iec786
Senior Member
Joined: 06 February 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 508
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 June 2012 at 11:33pm |
Reepicheep wrote:
Well, iec786, since you continue to make false claims about the contents of�Deedat's book, I see little point in continuing this discussion.
�
The only muslim sect that considers the swoon theory to be true is the Ahmadiyyas.� I've never understood why so many Sunni muslims consider Deedat to be a great scholar, when his writings not only contradict Sunni beliefs,�they also�contradict the koran. |
Let me tell you Islam has no sects? All these so called wanna be Muslims,claim to follow Islam the way they see it.Islam is One Allah and Muhammad is the final messenger.Quraan and the hadith.
iec786, since you continue to make false claims about the contents of�Deedat's book
Such as?
The only muslim sect that considers the swoon theory to be true is the Ahmadiyyas. These are not in the fold of Islam.
|
|
Reepicheep
Senior Member
Joined: 06 November 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 324
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 June 2012 at 8:27am |
iec786 wrote: he only muslim sect that considers the swoon theory to be true is the Ahmadiyyas. These are not in the fold of Islam.
You say that Ahmadiyyas are outside the fold of Islam because they consider the swoon theory to be true. Deedat considers the swoon theory to be true. Therefore, I guess you consider Deedat to also be outside the fold of Islam? And if, as you claim, you consider yourself to be a student of Deedat, then I guess you consider yourself to be outside the fold of Islam, too?
|
|
iec786
Senior Member
Joined: 06 February 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 508
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 June 2012 at 1:39pm |
Deedat considers the swoon theory to be true.
He quoted the swoon theory from the Bible.He never accepted the swoon theory.
I guess you consider Deedat to also be outside the fold of Islam? And if, as you claim, you consider yourself to be a student of Deedat, then I guess you consider yourself to be outside the fold of Islam, too?
Lol you wish.
|
|
iec786
Senior Member
Joined: 06 February 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 508
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 June 2012 at 1:54pm |
Caringheart wrote:
I must address this as I have given it quite a lot of study.Here iec786 is asserting that, according to Islam, Judas was crucified in Jesus' place.� How does he think this occurred... this substitution?
How did Jesus come in Mary's belly without a male intervention? dont you think that he would save Jesus who begged to be saved in the garden when he prayed.
I have had arguments with other Muslims who assert that there was a bar-Jesus that took Jesus' place on the cross, due to Roman error.Anyone who knows anything about Romans, and Roman history, and the Roman military and societal structure, knows that� such an error would never happen.� It would have cost the soldier his own life to allow such a mistake or substitution, to occur.� Romans were not careless in their duties due to the cost to their own lives if they were.� Romans were ruthless.
The Quraan says And they (disbelievers) plotted [to kill 'Iesa (Jesus) ], and Allah planned too. And Allah is the Best of the planners.
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And ...
But Allah raised him ['Iesa (Jesus)] up (with his body and soul) unto Himself (and he is in the heavens). And Allah is Ever All-Powerful, All-Wise.
As far as witnesses at the cross, Mary the mother of Jesus was there, Mary Magdalene was there... many women were there... 'all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place'... and so was John whom Jesus gave charge to be as a son to Mary His mother, after His death."When Jesus then saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold, your son!"The disciples fled yes, at Jesus capture, but no where is there any statement as to whether or not they returned, to watch at a distance, the crucifixion.� This matter is not addressed, except in as much as the above statement.� We do not know which of them may have been there, aside from 'the disciple whom He loved', assumed to be John. �It is sensible to me to assume that they were there.
New Living Translation (�2007)
Then all his disciples deserted him and ran away
If all ran away then who recorded this incident????
� Joseph of Arimathea("a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jews") came to claim the body to bury it.� How could the disciples not be there to witness the end of one they loved so much... to watch and see how He might be saved at the last minute.The greater testimony is in the crowd of witnesses who saw Jesus after His resurrection.All these reports were never disputed during the time in which they were being written... during the time in which the witnesses would still have been living and well able to make dispute.
New Living Translation (�2007)
Then all his disciples deserted him and ran away
Does all mean all in your language?????
Addressing the topic of this thread it seems clear to me that Mr Deedat does indeed contradict the teaching of both the Bible and the Qur'an.
Well well well .
|
|
|
Caringheart
Senior Member
Joined: 02 March 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 2991
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 26 June 2012 at 1:49pm |
iec786 wrote:
Caringheart wrote:
I must address this as I have given it quite a lot of study.Here iec786 is asserting that, according to Islam, Judas was crucified in Jesus' place. How does he think this occurred... this substitution?
How did Jesus come in Mary's belly without a male intervention? dont you think that he would save Jesus who begged to be saved in the garden when he prayed.
I have had arguments with other Muslims who assert that there was a bar-Jesus that took Jesus' place on the cross, due to Roman error.Anyone who knows anything about Romans, and Roman history, and the Roman military and societal structure, knows that such an error would never happen. It would have cost the soldier his own life to allow such a mistake or substitution, to occur. Romans were not careless in their duties due to the cost to their own lives if they were. Romans were ruthless.
The Quraan says And they (disbelievers) plotted [to kill 'Iesa (Jesus) ], and Allah planned too. And Allah is the Best of the planners.
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And ...
But Allah raised him ['Iesa (Jesus)] up (with his body and soul) unto Himself (and he is in the heavens). And Allah is Ever All-Powerful, All-Wise.
As far as witnesses at the cross, Mary the mother of Jesus was there, Mary Magdalene was there... many women were there... 'all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place'... and so was John whom Jesus gave charge to be as a son to Mary His mother, after His death."When Jesus then saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold, your son!"The disciples fled yes, at Jesus capture, but no where is there any statement as to whether or not they returned, to watch at a distance, the crucifixion. This matter is not addressed, except in as much as the above statement. We do not know which of them may have been there, aside from 'the disciple whom He loved', assumed to be John. It is sensible to me to assume that they were there.
New Living Translation (�2007)
Then all his disciples deserted him and ran away
If all ran away then who recorded this incident????
Joseph of Arimathea("a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jews") came to claim the body to bury it. How could the disciples not be there to witness the end of one they loved so much... to watch and see how He might be saved at the last minute.The greater testimony is in the crowd of witnesses who saw Jesus after His resurrection.All these reports were never disputed during the time in which they were being written... during the time in which the witnesses would still have been living and well able to make dispute.
New Living Translation (�2007)
Then all his disciples deserted him and ran away
Does all mean all in your language?????
Addressing the topic of this thread it seems clear to me that Mr Deedat does indeed contradict the teaching of both the Bible and the Qur'an.
Well well well .
|
|
Why do you answer a question with a question? Ok, yes, by God you think it was done... but this does not answer my question. How in your mind did it occur in human terms? Jesus who was well known, yet someone else was crucified in his place? You think God blinded all men that they could not see? You think God made another man to look like Jesus and deceive all the people... Roman soldiers, apostles, Pontius Pilate, everyday citizens? Is this what you believe? The disciples ran away when Jesus was taken away to trial. There is nothing to say that they did not return to see the crucifixion. Evidently you did not read what I wrote. The incident was recorded in the telling by the people who were there to witness... by word of mouth, as all things were, and always have been. Why in your mind does running away mean a permanent condition. Obviously it was not a permanent condition or we would not have Christianity today.
|
|