IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Religion - Islam > Interfaith Dialogue
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Does God beget ?  What is Islam What is Islam  Donate Donate
  FAQ FAQ  Quran Search Quran Search  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Does God beget ?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 53>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
robin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 17 May 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 595
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 July 2008 at 1:14am
Originally posted by minuteman minuteman wrote:

 
 That is true. It is the mistake of the bible writers. Quran blames them of those things. The Quran has warned every one not to take any one Other than God as their lords. (Arbab un min dun i Allah).
 
 But what did the christians and the church do? They not only took Jesus as a Lord (which was forbidden) but they took the disciples as lords too. That was forbidden. That corrupted and made a mess of the bible. The real teachings of Jesus got lost on the way.
 
 The Quran blames Jews for downgrading (and even killing) the men of God (i.e. why they are called Maghdhoob Alaihim). The Quran calls the christians as Dhaaleen i.e they went astray after getting the guidance. They also did the opposite of the Jews. The christians upgraded the men of God to a higher status than where they belonged. They made a god out of a simple messenger of God i.e. Jesus.
 
 Another thing, the church tried to support inspiration against revelation (Wahi). Inspiration is of much lower level than revelation. The church said that the writers of the bible were inspired. But we Muslims believe that God spoke to the disciples, i.e. a higher status than inspiration. That is, God revealed special knowledge to the disciples. Quran does not blame the disciples of Jesus at all. But the bible NT says that all disciples neglected Jesus and fled, even cursed Jesus.
 
 It may be true. But we Muslims do not have to believe such bad things.  But is does show we can all fall at times!-robin
 
"Lord" was a common form of address in the 1st century much like Sir, Master, Esquire, etc. today.    Lord must be view in relation to conext and time frame (as with all Biblical texts).   Today its meaning has been very much reduced in conection with forms of address!

FROM http://vines.mike-obrien.net/

1(Lord)  kurios (Noun) LORD

Properly an adjective, signifying "having power" (kuros) or "authority," is used as a noun, variously translated in the NT, "'Lord,' 'master,' 'Master,' 'owner,' 'Sir,' a title of wide significance, occurring in each book of the NT save Tit. and the Epistles of Joh. . It is used (a) of an owner, as in Lu. 19:33, cp. Mt. 20:8; Ac. 16:16; Ga. 4:1; or of one who has the disposal of anything, as the Sabbath, Mt. 12:8; (b) of a master, i.e., one to whom service is due on any ground, Mt. 6:24; 24:50; Eph. 6:5; (c) of an Emperor or King, Ac. 25:26; Re. 17:14; (d) of idols, ironically, 1Co. 8:5, cp. Isa. 26:13; (e) as a title of respect addressed to a father, Mt. 21:30, a husband, 1Pe. 3:6, a master, Mt. 13:27; Lu. 13:8, a ruler, Mt. 27:63, an angel, Ac. 10:4; Re. 7:14; (f) as a title of courtesy addressed to a stranger, Joh. 12:21; 20:15; Ac. 16:30; from the outset of His ministry this was a common form of address to the Lord Jesus, alike by the people, Mt. 8:2; Joh. 4:11, and by His disciples, Mt. 8:25; Lu. 5:8; Joh. 6:68; (g) kurios is the Sept. and NT representative of Heb. Jehovah ('Lord' in Eng. versions), see Mt. 4:7; Jas. 5:11, e.g., of adon, Lord, Mt. 22:44, and of Adonay, Lord, Mt. 1:22; it also occurs for Elohim, God, 1Pe. 1:25. "Thus the usage of the word in the NT follows two main lines: one-- a-f, customary and general, the other, g, peculiar to the Jews, and drawn from the Greek translation of the OT. "Christ Himself assumed the title, Mt. 7:21,22; 9:38; 22:41-45; Mr. 5:19 (cp. Ps. . 66:16; the parallel passage, Lu. 8:39, has 'God'); Lu. 19:31; Joh. 13:13, apparently intending it in the higher senses of its current use, and at the same time suggesting its OT associations. "His purpose did not become clear to the disciples until after His resurrection, and the revelation of His Deity consequent thereon. Thomas, when he realized the significance of the presence of a mortal wound in the body of a living man, immediately joined with it the absolute title of Deity, saying, 'My Lord and my God,' Joh. 20:28. Thereafter, except in Ac. 10:4; Re. 7:14, there is no record that kurios was ever again used by believers in addressing any save God and the Lord Jesus; cp. Ac. 2:47 with Ac. 4:29,30. "How soon and how completely the lower meaning had been superseded is seen in Peter's declaration in his first sermon after the resurrection, 'God hath made Him, Lord,' Ac. 2:36, and that in the house of Cornelius, 'He is Lord of all,' Ac. 10:36; cp. De. 10:14; Mt. 11:25; Ac. 17:24. In his writings the implications of his early teaching are confirmed and developed. Thus Ps. . 34:8, 'O taste and see that Jehovah is good,' is applied to the Lord Jesus, 1Pe. 2:3, and 'Jehovah of Hosts, Him shall ye sanctify,' Isa. 8:13, becomes 'sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord,' 1Pe. 3:15. "So also James who uses kurios alike of God, Jas. 1:7 (cp. Jas. 1:5); 3:9; 4:15; 5:4,10,11, and of the Lord Jesus, Jas. 1:1 (where the possibility that kai is intended epexegetically, i.e. = even, cp. 1Th. 3:11, should not be overlooked); Jas. 2:1 (lit., 'our Lord Jesus Christ of glory,' cp. Ps. . 24:7; 29:3; Ac. 7:2; 1Co. 2:8); 5:7,8, while the language of Jas. 4:10; 5:15, is equally applicable to either. " Jude. , Jude. 1:4, speaks of 'our only--Lord, Jesus Christ,' and immediately, Jude. 1:5, uses 'Lord' of God (see the re Mr. able marg. here), as he does later, Jude. 1:9,14. "Paul ordinarily uses kurios of the Lord Jesus, 1Co. 1:3, e.g., but also on occasion, of God, in quotations from the OT, 1Co. 3:20, e.g., and in his own words, 1Co. 3:5, cp. 1Co. 3:10. It is equally appropriate to either in 1Co. 7:25; 2Co. 3:16; 8:21; 1Th. 4:6, and if 1Co. 11:32 is to be interpreted by 1Co. 10:21,22, the Lord Jesus is intended, but if by Heb. 12:5-9, then kurios here also = God. 1Ti. 6:15,16 is probably to be understood of the Lord Jesus, cp. Re. 17:14. "Though Joh. does not use 'Lord' in his Epistles, and though, like the other Evangelists, he ordinarily uses the personal Name in his narrative, yet he occasionally speaks of Him as 'the Lord,' Joh. 4:1; 6:23; 11:2; 20:20; 21:12. "The full significance of this association of Jesus with God under the one appellation, 'Lord,' is seen when it is remembered that these men belonged to the only monotheistic race in the world. To associate with the Creator one known to be a creature, however exalted, though possible to Pagan philosophers, was quite impossible to a Jew. "It is not recorded that in the days of His flesh any of His disciples either addressed the Lord, or spoke of Him, by His personal Name. Where Paul has occasion to refer to the facts of the Gospel history he speaks of what the Lord Jesus said, Ac. 20:35, and did, 1Co. 11:23, and suffered, 1Th. 2:15; 5:9,10. It is our Lord Jesus who is coming, 1Th. 2:19, etc. In prayer also the title is given, 1Th. 3:11; Eph. 1:3; the sinner is invited to believe on the Lord Jesus, Ac. 16:31; 20:21, and the saint to look to the Lord Jesus for deliverance, Ro. 7:24,25, and in the few exceptional cases in which the personal Name stands alone a reason is always discernible in the immediate context. "The title 'Lord,' as given to the Savior, in its full significance rests upon the resurrection, Ac. 2:36; Ro. 10:9; 14:9, and is realized only in the Holy Spirit, 1Co. 12:3." * [* From Notes on Thessalonians, by Hogg and Vine, p. 25.]

2despotes (Noun)

"a master, lord, one who possesses supreme authority," is used in personal address to God in Lu. 2:29; Ac. 4:24; Re. 6:10; with reference to Christ, 2Pe. 2:1; Jude. 1:4; elsewhere it is translated "master," "masters," 1Ti. 6:1,2; 2Ti. 2:21 (of Christ); Tit. 2:9; 1Pe. 2:18. See MASTER. Note: For rabboni, rendered "Lord" in the AV of Mr. 10:51, see RABBONI.

3megistan (Noun)

Akin to megistos, "greatest," the superlative degree of megas, "great," denotes "chief men, nobles;" it is rendered "lords" in Mr. 6:21, of nobles in Herod's entourage; "princes" in Re. 6:15; 18:23, RV (AV, "great men").

4kurieuo (Verb)

Denotes "to be lord of, to exercise lordship over," Lu. 22:25; Ro. 6:9,14; 7:1; 14:9; 2Co. 1:24; 1 tim. 6:15; see DOMINION, B, No. 1.

5katakurieuo (Verb)

A strengthened form of No. 1, is rendered "lording it" in 1Pe. 5:3, RV: see DOMINION, B, No. 2.

6kuriakos (Adjective)

From kurios (A, No. 1), signifies "pertaining to a lord or master;" "lordly" is not a legitimate rendering for its use in the NT, where it is used only of Christ; in 1Co. 11:20, of the Lord's Supper, or the Supper of the Lord (see FEAST); in Re. 1:10, of the Day of the Lord (see DAY, No. 1).

 


Edited by robin - 23 July 2008 at 1:19am
Back to Top
minuteman View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member

Joined: 25 March 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1642
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote minuteman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 July 2008 at 9:29am
 
 That is true. It is the mistake of the bible writers. Quran blames them of those things. The Quran has warned every one not to take any one Other than God as their lords. (Arbab un min dun i Allah).
 
 But what did the christians and the church do? They not only took Jesus as a Lord (which was forbidden) but they took the disciples as lords too. That was forbidden. That corrupted and made a mess of the bible. The real teachings of Jesus got lost on the way.
 
 The Quran blames Jews for downgrading (and even killing) the men of God (i.e. why they are called Maghdhoob Alaihim). The Quran calls the christians as Dhaaleen i.e they went astray after getting the guidance. They also did the opposite of the Jews. The christians upgraded the men of God to a higher status than where they belonged. They made a god out of a simple messenger of God i.e. Jesus.
 
 Another thing, the church tried to support inspiration against revelation (Wahi). Inspiration is of much lower level than revelation. The church said that the writers of the bible were inspired. But we Muslims believe that God spoke to the disciples, i.e. a higher status than inspiration. That is, God revealed special knowledge to the disciples. Quran does not blame the disciples of Jesus at all. But the bible NT says that all disciples neglected Jesus and fled, even cursed Jesus.
 
 It may be true. But we Muslims do not have to believe such bad things.


Edited by minuteman - 22 July 2008 at 9:35am
Back to Top
robin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 17 May 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 595
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 July 2008 at 9:28am
Originally posted by myahya myahya wrote:

Robin,

I believe that the twelve disciples of Isa a.s. were faithful. The verses you quoted show a serious warning to people for not changing the Gospel, not removing from it a word and not adding to it a word. But people didn�t take this warning and changed the bible as much as they could. I would guess it happed even mostly in churches and especially they did their best to REMOVE many parts which used to clarify the truth explicitly.
 
SHOW ME WHAT HAS BEEN REMOVED THEN!
Back to Top
myahya View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 06 February 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 222
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote myahya Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 July 2008 at 4:00am
Robin,

I believe that the twelve disciples of Isa a.s. were faithful. The verses you quoted show a serious warning to people for not changing the Gospel, not removing from it a word and not adding to it a word. But people didn�t take this warning and changed the bible as much as they could. I would guess it happed even mostly in churches and especially they did their best to REMOVE many parts which used to clarify the truth explicitly.


Edited by myahya - 22 July 2008 at 4:01am
Back to Top
robin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 17 May 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 595
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 July 2008 at 11:51pm
Originally posted by minuteman minuteman wrote:

 John was talking about th efour gospels. Then why were the acts and other so much material from paul added into the bible. There is very little real teachings of Jesus in the bible. The maximum is the philosophy of paul that is added to the bible (The four gospels).
 
Paul came in the name of Jesus. Muhammad came in the name of Allah as it says in the Quran "In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Ever Merciful". Jesus had warned about the false ones who would come in his name.
 
John was not talking about the Gospels as the date of His & last Gospel is c. 98 C.E. and John finished the Revelation in C. 96 C.E.!
 
If Jesus teaching are not in the Bible then you have never read the 4 Gospels properly!
 
 
One example concerning Jesus' the Sermon on the Mount, it is reported that Mahatma Gandhi said to a onetime viceroy of India, Lord Irwin:
 
           "When your country and mine shall get together on the teachings laid down by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount, we shall have solved the problems not only of our countries but those of the whole world."
 
That Sermon contains the Golden Rule. In keeping with Matthew�s theme, he tells that Jesus had come not to destroy the law of Moses but to fulfill it and that the Golden Rule actually was what the Law and the prophets were all about.�See Matt. 5:17 & 7:12.
 
You will note that Jesus many times explains what the Law means & how it is to be applied.


Edited by robin - 22 July 2008 at 12:47am
Back to Top
minuteman View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member

Joined: 25 March 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1642
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote minuteman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 July 2008 at 10:21pm
 John was talking about th efour gospels. Then why were the acts and other so much material from paul added into the bible. There is very little real teachings of Jesus in the bible. The maximum is the philosophy of paul that is added to the bible (The four gospels).
 
Paul came in the name of Jesus. Muhammad came in the name of Allah as it says in the Quran "In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Ever Merciful". Jesus had warned about the false ones who would come in his name.


Edited by minuteman - 21 July 2008 at 10:22pm
Back to Top
robin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 17 May 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 595
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 July 2008 at 12:58am
Originally posted by myahya myahya wrote:

Robin: But the Bible has not change it and that is what matters!

It has not changed what? That people should believe in Isa a.s. and follow him? Today, following him can not be fulfilled by denying the prophet after him while Isa a.s. has not been the last one. Therefore, believing in him is not changed but following him can be truly achieved through following the prophet after him who is the last one.

I (as a Muslim) believe in Isa a.s. and am following Mohammad s.a.w.a. who is the prophet after Isa a.s., and consistent to what Isa a.s. proclaimed with regards to believing in Mohammad s.a.w.a. and following him. A so called Christian who does not believe in Mohammad s.a.w.a., is not following Isa a.s. in this matter. If you be sincere in your faith and Holy Scripture you will find many verses corresponding to Mohammad s.a.w.a., Islam, and Islamic history even from the present very corrupted Gospels. On what ground does one want to believe in Isa a.s. denying Mohammad s.a.w.a.? Does it fall into the same category of the one that many Jews have selected to believe in Mosa a.s. denying Isa a.s.? Allaho�alam.



 
As Jesus himself had penned by his faithful follower John (of the Gospel) that there was to be no more scripture added to or following the Bible:-
 
Revelation 1:1
A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John,
 
Revelation 22:18-19
"I am bearing witness to everyone that hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll; 19 and if anyone takes anything away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take his portion away from the trees of life and out of the holy city, things which are written about in this scroll.
 
The Bible is God's word complete!
Back to Top
myahya View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 06 February 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 222
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote myahya Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 July 2008 at 7:59am

Robin: But the Bible has not change it and that is what matters!

It has not changed what? That people should believe in Isa a.s. and follow him? Today, following him can not be fulfilled by denying the prophet after him while Isa a.s. has not been the last one. Therefore, believing in him is not changed but following him can be truly achieved through following the prophet after him who is the last one.

I (as a Muslim) believe in Isa a.s. and am following Mohammad s.a.w.a. who is the prophet after Isa a.s., and consistent to what Isa a.s. proclaimed with regards to believing in Mohammad s.a.w.a. and following him. A so called Christian who does not believe in Mohammad s.a.w.a., is not following Isa a.s. in this matter. If you be sincere in your faith and Holy Scripture you will find many verses corresponding to Mohammad s.a.w.a., Islam, and Islamic history even from the present very corrupted Gospels. On what ground does one want to believe in Isa a.s. denying Mohammad s.a.w.a.? Does it fall into the same category of the one that many Jews have selected to believe in Mosa a.s. denying Isa a.s.? Allaho�alam.





Edited by myahya - 20 July 2008 at 8:05am
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 53>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.