60 Questions for Christians to Answer
Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Interfaith Dialogue
Forum Description: It is for Interfaith dialogue, where Muslims discuss with non-Muslims. We encourge that dialogue takes place in a cordial atmosphere on various topics including religious tolerance.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9779
Printed Date: 26 April 2024 at 8:20pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: 60 Questions for Christians to Answer
Posted By: khairullah
Subject: 60 Questions for Christians to Answer
Date Posted: 14 July 2007 at 11:54pm
|
60 Questions for the Christians To Answer
Hussein Khalid Al-Hussein According to most Christians, Jesus was God-incarnate, fully man and fully God. Can the finite and the infinite be one? "To be fully God" means freedom from finite forms and from helplessness, and to be "full man" means the absence of divinity.
1. To be son is to be less than divine and to be divine is to be no one�s son. How could Jesus have the attributes of Sonship and divinity altogether?
2. Christians assert that Jesus claimed to be God when they quote him in John 14:9: "He that has seen me has seen the Father". Didn�t Jesus clearly say that people have never seen God, as
3. Christians say that Jesus was God because he was called Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah, and "savior". Ezekiel was addressed in the Bible as Son of Man. Jesus spoke of "the peace makers" as Sons of God. Any person who followed the Will and Plan of God was called SON OF GOD in the Jewish tradition and in their language1. "Messiah" which in Hebrew means "God�s anointed" and not "Christ", and "Cyrus" the person is called "Messiah" or "the anointed". As for "savior", in II Kings 13:5, other individuals were given that title too without being gods. So where is the proof in these terms that Jesus was God when the word son is not exclusively used for him alone?
4. Christians claim that Jesus acknowledged that he and God were one in the sense of nature when he says in John 10:30 "I and my father are one". Later on in John 17:21-23, Jesus refers to his followers and himself and God as one in five places. So why did they give the previous "one" a different meaning from the other five "ones?
5. Is God three-in-one and one in three simultaneously or one at a time?
6. If God is one and three simultaneously, then none of the three could be the complete God. Granting that such was the case, then when Jesus was on earth, he wasn�t a complete God, nor was the "Father in Heaven" a whole God. Doesn�t that contradict what Jesus always said about His God and our God in heaven, his Lord and our Lord? Does that also mean that there was no complete god then, between the claimed crucifixion and the claimed resurrection?
7. If God is one and three at a time, then who was the God in heaven when Jesus was on earth? Wouldn�t this contradict his many references to a God in Heaven that sent him?
< =text/ minmax_bound="true"> < src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js" =text/ minmax_bound="true"> 8. If God is three and one at the same time, who was the God in Heaven within three days between the claimed crucifixion and the claimed resurrection?
9. Christians say that: "The Father(F) is God, the Son(S) is God, and the Holy Ghost(H) is God, but the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost is not the Father". In simple arithmetic terms, if F = G, S = G, and H = G, then it follows that F = S = H, while the second part of the statement suggests that F� S� H (meaning, "not equal"). Isn�t that a contradiction to the Christian dogma of Trinity in itself?
10. If Jesus was God, why did he tell the man who called him "good master" not to call him "good" because accordingly, there is none good but his God in Heaven alone?
11. Why do Christians say that God is three-in-one and one in three when Jesus says in Mark 12:29: "The Lord our God is one Lord" in as many places as yet in the Bible?
12. If belief in the Trinity was such a necessary condition for being a Christian, why didn�t Jesus teach and emphasize it to the Christians during his time? How were those followers of Jesus considered Christians without ever hearing the term Trinity? Had the Trinity been the spinal cord of Christianity, Jesus would have emphasized it on many occasions and would have taught and explained it in detail to the people.
13. Christians claim that Jesus was God as they quote in John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God". This is John speaking and not Jesus. Also, the Greek word for the first occurrence of God is hotheos which means "the God" or "God" with a capital "G", while the Greek word for its second occurrence is tontheos, which means "a god " or "god" with a small "g". Isn�t this dishonesty and inconsistency on the part of those translating the Greek Bible? ? Isn�t such quotation in John 1:1 recognized by every Christian scholar of the Bible to have been written by a Jew named Philo Alexandria way before Jesus and John?
14. Wasn�t the word "god" or "tontheos" also used to refer to others as well as in II Corinthians 4:4 "(and the Devil is) the god of this world" and in Exodus 7:1 "See , I have made thee (Moses ) a god to Pharaoh"?
SALVATION: Christians say that "GOD lost His only son to save us". To whom did God lose Jesus if He owns the whole universe?
15. If it was agreeable with God�s Majesty to have sons, He could have created a million sons the like of Jesus. So what is the big clear deal about this only son?
16. Why does the Bible say that Jesus wanted to die on the cross, when the one on the cross was shouting "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" according to Matthew 27:45 and Mark 15:33? 17. If God had wanted to save us, couldn�t He have done that without sacrificing Jesus?
18. God is Just, and justice requires that nobody should be punished for the sins of others nor should some people be saved by punishing other people. Doesn�t the claim that God sacrificed Jesus to save us because He was Just, contradict the definition of justice?
19. People sacrifice things they have to get something they don�t have when they can�t have both. Christians say that "God sacrificed His only son to save us". We know that God is Almighty; to whom did He sacrifice Jesus?
20. A real sacrifice is when you can�t get back what you have offered, so what would be the big deal about such a sacrifice if God could recover the same offering (according to the Christians� terminology)?
21. If all the Christians are saved through Jesus and are going to Heaven no matter what they do, then the teachings of Jesus are irrelevant and the definition of good and bad are also rendered irrelevant. If this is not so, then do Christians who believe in Jesus yet do not follow his teachings nor repent go to Hell?
22. How can Christians take deeds as irrelevant after becoming one when Jesus says2: "But I say unto you that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the Day of Judgment. For by the words thou shalt be justified, and by the words thou shalt be condemned"?
23. Christians say that people go to Heaven only through Jesus yet Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7:8-16 that the unbelieving husband is acceptable to God because he is united with his wife and vice versa, and their pagan children are also acceptable to God. So people can go to heaven without believing in Jesus according to this.
24. How come the Bible says that all
25. According to Christians, those who have not been baptized will go to Hell. So even the infants and babies go to Hell if not baptized, since they are born with an inherited original sin. Doesn�t this contradict the definition of justice? Why would God punish people for sins they never committed?
HOLY SPIRIT: The only place in the Bible where the Paraclete was called the Holy Spirit is in John 14:26 "But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you". What has the Holy Spirit brought or taught for the last 2000 years?
26. Christians say that the Paraclete means the Holy Spirit3. Jesus said in John 16:7-8: "If I do not go away the Paraclete will not come to you". This could not mean the Holy spirit, since the Holy spirit was said to have been there before Jesus was even born as in Luke 1:41: "Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit". Here, the Holy Spirit was also present during Jesus life time. So how could this fit with the condition that Jesus must go away so that the Holy Spirit will come?
27. In John 16:7-8, it says: "But if go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convict the world of sins and of righteousness and of Judgment". What do "he" and "him" refer here? Don�t they refer to a man?
28. Does the Holy Spirit talk to good Christians and bad Christians as well? Is the Holy spirit with them all the time or just at certain times? When does it start visiting a person who wants to become a Christian?
29. How can you as a Christian tell if the Holy Spirit is inside another Christian? How come many Christians fooled people by claiming that the Holy spirit was inside them only to be converted to another religion later on? 30. Does the Holy Spirit dictate what Christians should do without choice or freedom at all or does it only guide them and they have the freedom to follow or not?
31. If the Holy Spirit dictates what Christian should do, why do Christians commit sins and make mistakes? How can you explain the conversion to other religions and atheism of many Christians? Are they told to do that by the Holy Spirit?
32. If the Holy Spirit guides Christians only, and they are free to do what they want, then how do we know that the writers of the Gospels didn�t make mistakes in writing them?
33. If Christians believe that the Holy Spirit comes and talks to them everyday, why don�t they ask the Holy Spirit about which version of the Bible to follow since there are too many versions floating around?
Without borrowing from other religions and systems, can Christianity provide people with a complete way of life? Since Christianity is limited to spiritual life and does not provide law, how can a society decide which laws are right or wrong?
34. Why do the Christians say that Jesus came with a universal mission when he said that he was sent to the Jews only? He said to the Canaanite woman who asked him to heal her daughter from demon-possession: "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of
RESURRECTION: If you read Matthew (28:1-10), Mark (16:1-20), Luke (24:1-12), and John (20: 1-18), you will find contradicting stories. They all agreed that the tomb was guarded for three days. However, they reported the discovery of the empty tomb differently.
35. Which narration now is more authentic?
36. Why is the appearance of Jesus after the crucifixion taken as a proof of his resurrection when there is an explanation that he was not dead because someone else was crucified in his place when God saved Him?
37. How did Matthew know of the claimed agreement between the soldiers and the chief priest? Can't someone say that someone paid the women a large sum of money and told them to spread the word around that Jesus rose from the dead, with the same authenticity as that of the story of Matthew?
38. Why did they believe that man in the white clothes? Why did they believe he was an angel? John�s narration is too strange, since he says that Mary did not recognize Jesus (one of the two) while talking to him, and she only recognized him when he called her by her name.
39. How does an empty tomb prove that Jesus was crucified ? Isn�t it that God is capable of removing another man from the tomb, and of resurrecting him too?
40. The Gospels are believed to be the verbatim words of God, they are supposed to be dictated by the Holy Spirit to the Disciples who wrote them. If the source were the same, why shouldn�t they correspond with each other in reporting such an important event?
41. How could Matthew, Mark, Luke and John be considered eyewitnesses of resurrection when the Bible implies that nobody at all saw Jesus coming out of the tomb?
BIBLE: If the Christians consider the Old Testament as God�s Word, why did they cancel the parts of the Old Testament that dealt with punishment (example: the punishment for adultery)?
42. Why doesn�t Mark 16:9-20 exist in as many versions of the Bible while it exists as a footnote or between brackets in some other versions? Is a footnote in the Bible still considered as God�s word, especially when it addresses an important feature like the Ascension?
43. Why does the Catholic Bible contain 73 books while the Protestant Bible has only 66? With both claiming to have the complete Word of God, which one should be believed and why?
44. Where do those new translations of the Bible keep coming from when the original Bible is not even available? The Greek manuscripts which are translations themselves are not even similar with each other.
45. How can you take two gospels from writers who never met Jesus, like Mark and Luke?
46. Why is half of the New Testament written by a man who never even met Jesus in his lifetime? PAUL claimed with no proof that he had met Jesus while on his way from
CONTRADICTIONS: 47. Concerning the controversial issues in the Bible, how can Christians decide by two-thirds majority what is God�s Word and what is not, as the prefaces of some Bibles say like that one of the RSV?
48. Why does Luke in his gospel report the Ascension on Easter Day, and in the Acts, in which he is recognized as the author, forty days later?
49. The genealogy of Jesus is mentioned in Matthew and Luke only. Matthew listed 26 forefathers from Joseph to David while Luke enumerated 41 forefathers. Only Joseph matches with Joseph in those two lists. Not a single other name matches! If these were inspired by God word by word, how could they be different? Some claim that one is for Mary and one is for Joseph, but where does it says Mary in those two Gospels?
50. If Moses wrote the first books of the Old Testament, how could Moses write his own obituary? Moses died in the fifth book at age 120 as mentioned in Deut. 34:5-10.
51. In the King James Version, why does it report seven years of famine in II Samuel 24:13 while it reports three years of famine in I Chronicles 21:12? Why did they change both to three years in the New International Version and other versions?
52. Still In the same King James Version, why does it say that Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign in II Chronicles 21:12, while it says eighteen years in II Kings 24:8? Why did they change in both to eighteen in the new Versions?
53. In all versions, why does it say that David slew the men of seven hundred chariots of the Syrians, and forty thousand horsemen as evidenced in II Samuel 10:18 while its says seven thousand men which fought in chariots, and forty thousand footmen, in I Chronicles 19:18?
54. In all versions, why does it report two thousand baths in I Kings 7:26 while II Chronicles 4:5 reports three thousand?
55. In the King James version, why does it report that Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses in II Chronicles 9:25 while it accounts that Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses in 1 KINGS 4:26? Why did they change both to four thousand in the new versions?
56. In Genesis 1, God�s creation progresses from grass to trees to fowls, whales, cattle and creeping things and finally to man and woman. Genesis 2, however, puts the creation of man before cattle and fowl and woman subsequent to beast. How can this be explained?
QUR'AN AND CHRISTIANS This section does not inquire or interrogate, but rather provides the reader with some of the Qur�anic verses that address the Christians in particular, and the People of the Scripture in general. A great portion of the Qur�an pertains to or involves the Christians and the Jews and I decided to just choose verses that are related to the topic of this manuscript.
"Lo! The likeness of Jesus with Allah is as the likeness of Adam. He created him of dust, then said unto him: Be, and he was." (Qur�an, 3:59)
"Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for Lords besides Allah. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto him).
And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him and in the hereafter, He will be one of the losers (Qur�an, 3:85)
And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, and Allah�s messenger. They slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them, and Lo! Those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain:
O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter ought concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him, so believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three"! Cease! [it is] better for you! Allah is only One God. Far is it removed from His transcendent majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as defender.
"And with those who say Lo! We are Christians, We made a covenant, but they forgot a part of that whereof they were admonished. Therefore We have stirred up enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection, when Allah will inform them of their handiwork.
O People of the Scripture! Now has our messenger come unto you, expounding unto you much of that which you used to hide in the Scripture, and forgiving much. Now has come unto light from Allah and plain scripture:
"They surely disbelieve who say; Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said: O children if
" And when Allah says: O Jesus, son of Mary: Did you say unto mankind: take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he says: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then You Knew it, You know what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Your mind. Lo! You, only You, are the knower of things hidden.
"And the Jews say: �Uzair [Ezra] is the son of Allah�, and the Christians say: �The Messiah is the son of Allah�. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah fights against them. How perverse they are!
MUHAMMAD OR JESUS? Christians claim that the prophecy in Deut. 18:18 refers to Jesus and not Muhammad. The verse says: "I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him." The only reason they resort to such interpretation is that both Moses and Jesus were prophets. Even this one contradicts their claim that Jesus was God and not a Prophet. Many prophets of the Jews had the similarity with Moses. However, if we compare Muhammad to Moses, we will find that:
Muhammad was an Arab, and the Arabs are from Ishmael, son of Abraham, while Moses was a Jew, and the Jews are from Isaac, son of Abraham. Hence, the term THEIR BRETHREN refers to the children of the first son being brethren of the children of the other. This couldn�t apply to Jesus, since he was a Jew.
FINAL QUESTIONS:
57. Why won�t you, Christian reader, come to hear and learn of the true religion of Jesus?
58. Have you, as a Christian, learned of Islam and if so, was it from the true Muslims?
59. As a Christian, do you agree that out of fairness and honesty you must investigate what Islam says about God, Jesus, including this life and the hereafter?
60. Being a Christian, do you also believe that we must all stand accountable to our Creator and that the Creator is Perfect and Just? As a sincere believer in God, don�t you owe it upon yourself to find out the entire unadulterated truth regardless of the consequences?
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/categories/christianity/ - I got a question from my side for all Christians. first Christians� faith is based on human words means what ever Paul Luke Mathew John Mark and Peter said 300 years after Jesus (PBUH) disappearance they believe it. every Christian in the world believe that the Bible is changed altered and Corrupted by humans even though its not permited in the Bible. �. . . If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book.� (Revelation 22:18-19) But who cares! They do not really believe! The Protestants have bravely expunged seven whole books from their Book of God!. and also there were dozens of Gospels like The Gospel of Mary The Gospel of Thomas � SO HERE IS MY QUESTION. DO YOU CHRISTIANS ATTRIBUTE THESE ERRORS IN THE BIBLE TO GOD Almighty? Error No. 1. Light was then before the source of light Genesis 1:3:5 and 14:19 Error No. 2 - Day came into existence before creation of Earth. Genesis 9:13 Error No. 3 - Earth came into existence before Sun. Genesis 1:9:13 and Genesis 1:14:19 Error No. 4 -Vegetation came into existence, before sunlight Genesis 11:13 and 14:19 Error No. 5 - The earth Will it perishes or will it abide forever? Psalm 102:25:26 contradicts in Psalm 78:69 and Ecclesiastics 1:4 Error No. 6 - The earth has got pillars. Samuel Job and Psalm Error No. 7 - The heavens have got pillars. Job 26:11 DO YOU CHRISTIANS ATTRIBUTE THESE ERRORS IN THE BIBLE TO GOD Almighty?
------------- 1:"The TRUTH stands out clear from error"2:256 2:"When comes the Help of God, and Victory And thou dost see the people enter God's Religion (ISLAM) in crowds".110:01-2. |
Replies:
Posted By: Aspiration
Date Posted: 15 July 2007 at 3:17pm
|
Asalam alaykum khairullah Insha'allah you are doing well. :) Thank you for your questions. I would love to try to answer you on the 60 questions and the other sub questions at the bottom. I first have to read through them. Fair enough? :) I will get back to you soon. Hopefully time permitting today. Until then have a nice day. Aspiration
|
Posted By: Douggg
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 12:40am
|
Hi Khairullah, 3. Christians say that Jesus was God because he was called Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah, and "savior". Ezekiel was addressed in the Bible as Son of Man. Jesus spoke of "the peace makers" as Sons of God. Any person who followed the Will and Plan of God was called SON OF GOD in the Jewish tradition and in their language1. "Messiah" which in Hebrew means "God�s anointed" and not "Christ", and "Cyrus" the person is called "Messiah" or "the anointed". As for "savior", in II Kings 13:5, other individuals were given that title too without being gods. So where is the proof in these terms that Jesus was God when the word son is not exclusively used for him alone? Ezekiel was called the son of man, but not the only begotten Son of God. Jesus was called the Son of Man because his mother was Mary. Your point on the "anointed" regarding Cyrus and in Daniel 9 is that of a language issue. I don't disagree over the language and application regarding Cyrus. In Daniel 9:25-26, the anointed in those two verses... it is pretty hard to deny that it points to Jesus. Jews claim that the anointed in verse 25 refers to Cyrus, while they have some division on who the anointed is in the very next verse. Some Jews say that refers to some 1st century CE high priests that went bad. The problem with their understanding is that Daniel doesn't use the word for anointed anywhere else in his writings and when he does in Daniel 9, the anointed is in one verse and then the very next one again. It is highly unlikely that those are two different anointed. There is a big difference in what the Jews (Judaism) believe regarding the moshiach and the Christian messiah. We Christians view messiah as saviour - from the penalty of our sins - which is eternal separation from God in the world to come. A Jew (Judaism) would view the moshiach - as a specific anointed man, favored by God to bring universal knowledge of God to the world and to teach the Jews on how to keep Torah. As far as Jesus being God from the nt, the disciples worshiped him when they experienced him after his resurrection. If you go through the nt you will find that Jesus is called Lord....which is the in-form emanation of the Father. Jesus never prayed to the Lord, because he was the Lord. Christians, beginning with the disciples, believe that Jesus is God was long before Mohamed. Jesus had warned about false christs and false messiahs that would come after him. And 500 years before Mohamed, John warned of antichrists that would come and deny Father and Son. Please keep in mind that Christians believe that Jesus is God long before Mohamed. Peace, Doug L. |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 8:22am
|
That is true. The Quran upholds it and accuses the christians of calling Jesus as God. there is no denial of that. Christians believed that long before Muhammad. Also please remember that Muhammad never came in the name of Jesus. You seem to have some wrong information about certain things which is evident from your post. Without any prejudice and without any intention of hurting any one, I may point out the Islamic version of things to you. You wrote: As far as Jesus being God from the nt, the disciples worshiped him when they experienced him after his resurrection. If you go through the nt you will find that Jesus is called Lord....which is the in-form emanation of the Father. Jesus never prayed to the Lord, because he was the Lord. The whole thing is wrong. The disciples worshipped him not throughout his ministry. Why they only started worshipping only at the last moment?? That is a false thing that they worshipped him at all or that he ever resurrected from the dead. He simply rose from the lying position. They said that Jesus had risen. What is the meaning of "Risen"! Please take the simplest meanings. The disciples did not know that he was a god until the last few days. Why?? We see Jesus being called a Lord. But that does not mean that he is father or god. He could not be the father because he never got married. About Lord, I see many men in the House of Lords in England. Another sentence that you wrote: Jesus never prayed to the Lord, because he was the Lord. That is also wrong because we see in the bibleNT that Jesus before his arrest, prayed so much heavily to God (Or his supposed father) that his sweat was running like blood and he beseeched his Lord (The real God) that if possible the cup may be taken away from him. Are you aware of these things?. If not then please go and check up or ask some one. Why did you say that Jesus did not pray to the Lord?? Then to whom he was praying?? To himself?? More later if required. But it is only for discussion. Not to undermine any one. ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 1:01pm
|
"Jesus never prayed to the Lord, because he was the Lord." Minuteman is right. This statement by Douggg is incorrect. The NT mentions over and over again that Jesus prayed to the Father, many times in seclusion, a fact which refutes the claim that he was only his disciples how to pray. Here are a few examples: Mark 1:35-37 35Very early in the morning, while it was still dark, Jesus got up, left the house and went off to a solitary place, where he prayed. 36Simon and his companions went to look for him, 37and when they found him, they exclaimed: "Everyone is looking for you!" Luke 5:15-16 15Yet the news about him spread all the more, so that crowds of people came to hear him and to be healed of their sicknesses. 16But Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed. Luke 6:12-16 12One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. 13When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: 14Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, 15Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, 16Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor. Luke 9:18-20 18Once when Jesus was praying in private and his disciples were with him, he asked them, "Who do the crowds say I am?"19They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, that one of the prophets of long ago has come back to life." 20"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Peter answered, "The Christ[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=9&version=31&context=chapter#fen-NIV-25314a" title="See footnote a - a ] of God." Clearly, even the NT says that Jesus did pray to God. If he was God, who was he praying to and why? ------------- Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162) |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 2:15pm
|
[QUOTE=khairullah]
60 Questions for the Christians To Answer
Hussein Khalid Al-Hussein According to most Christians, Jesus was God-incarnate, fully man and fully God. Can the finite and the infinite be one? "To be fully God" means freedom from finite forms and from helplessness, and to be "full man" means the absence of divinity.
1. To be son is to be less than divine and to be divine is to be no one�s son. How could Jesus have the attributes of Sonship and divinity altogether?
No actually, to be a son means that you come directly from something. Jesus was the Son of God, which means he came from God. Which means he came from devinity. Not very hard.
2. Christians assert that Jesus claimed to be God when they quote him in John 14:9: "He that has seen me has seen the Father". Didn�t Jesus clearly say that people have never seen God, as
Actually Jesus said nobody has seen the Father, only I who has come from the Father has seen the Father, I and the Father are One.
3. Christians say that Jesus was God because he was called Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah, and "savior". Ezekiel was addressed in the Bible as Son of Man. Jesus spoke of "the peace makers" as Sons of God. Any person who followed the Will and Plan of God was called SON OF GOD in the Jewish tradition and in their language1. "Messiah" which in Hebrew means "God�s anointed" and not "Christ", and "Cyrus" the person is called "Messiah" or "the anointed". As for "savior", in II Kings 13:5, other individuals were given that title too without being gods. So where is the proof in these terms that Jesus was God when the word son is not exclusively used for him alone?
And who gave them that title? Do you know what anointed means?
4. Christians claim that Jesus acknowledged that he and God were one in the sense of nature when he says in John 10:30 "I and my father are one". Later on in John 17:21-23, Jesus refers to his followers and himself and God as one in five places. So why did they give the previous "one" a different meaning from the other five "ones?
What you try to do is manipulate the scriptures. Very sneaky of you...LOL!
5. Is God three-in-one and one in three simultaneously or one at a time?
That all depends. Is God all knowing? Can God do anything? Is God all mighty? Then your answer is YES. God can do anything. he is the creator. Jesus is the Creator.
6. If God is one and three simultaneously, then none of the three could be the complete God. Granting that such was the case, then when Jesus was on earth, he wasn�t a complete God, nor was the "Father in Heaven" a whole God. Doesn�t that contradict what Jesus always said about His God and our God in heaven, his Lord and our Lord? Does that also mean that there was no complete god then, between the claimed crucifixion and the claimed resurrection?
Baloney. I don't think even you understand what you write..LOL! Have you read the Bible?
7. If God is one and three at a time, then who was the God in heaven when Jesus was on earth? Wouldn�t this contradict his many references to a God in Heaven that sent him?
That all depends on who your God is. My God can do anything,be anywhere and is almighty.
< =text/ minmax_bound="true"> < src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js " =text/ minmax_bound="true"> 8. If God is three and one at the same time, who was the God in Heaven within three days between the claimed crucifixion and the claimed resurrection?
And here we have proof of cutting and pasting instead of actually reading the Bible..LOL! Again I refer you to my post above.
9. Christians say that: "The Father(F) is God, the Son(S) is God, and the Holy Ghost(H) is God, but the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost is not the Father". In simple arithmetic terms, if F = G, S = G, and H = G, then it follows that F = S = H, while the second part of the statement suggests that F� S� H (meaning, "not equal"). Isn�t that a contradiction to the Christian dogma of Trinity in itself? Few doctrinal subjects have generated more passionate debate among Christians than the theme of the trinity. Churches have split and wars have even been fought over the issues that surround the nature of the Godhead.
|
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 2:16pm
| make sure you actually read this. It may make sense to you. |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 2:18pm
|
If all else fails, go and buy a Bible and read it from cover to cover. In the 3rd century, Sabellius, a Libyan priest living in Rome, taught that God is a single person with different titles�known as modalism. Thus, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit represent different hats or titles that God wears, depending on how He wishes to communicate with man at the time. It�s akin to water, which can take on the form of a solid, liquid, or gas. |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 2:20pm
|
as you will see, Jesus came to Earth so that we may see who God truely is. As Jesus stated none of us has see the Father. We need to know who he is. How do you know someone? Is Jesus Fully God? Another group questions whether Jesus actually possesses all the characteristics of the Eternal God. They stem from Arius, a 4th century Alexandrian priest, who had a different take on God. He taught that prior to making anything else, God created a son who was neither equal to, nor coeternal with, the Father. According to this idea, called Arianism, Jesus Christ is a supernatural creature, but He is neither fully human nor fully divine. Still others embrace a more immature version of this doctrine, holding that back in the dawn of time, God the Father had some form of cosmic intimate relations with the Holy Spirit and Jesus was the product. They reason, �How else can you call Him the Son?�
Therefore, by considering the primary definitions of God, and seeing that Jesus fits every one of those definitions, obviously, Jesus must be eternal God.
|
Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 2:29pm
|
Sabellius' account actually makes more sense than the traditional Christian view. Of course, I still think he was wrong, but his idea made alot more sense. Claiming that Jesus is all three, instead of just one aspect of God makes a whole lot more sense than that he was one just one portion of the Trinity. As for his water argument, I would humbly disagree. Water, be it solid, liquid or gas has the same molecular formula, H2O. This formula does not change, whether solid, liquid or gas. With the Trinity, the three parts are not the same. The son is flesh and blood, the Spirit is self-explanatory and the Father is something altogether different. This is not like water, which is H2O no matter which way you look at it.
------------- Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162) |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 3:39pm
|
islamispeace, Thank you for taking the time to read it. There is more!! His Enemies Knew Even Jesus� enemies understood and recognized His claim of equality with the Father God. When He boldly proclaimed, �I and my Father are one,� Jewish leaders were outraged and sought to execute Him. They understood unequivocally that Jesus was claiming to be God Himself. �The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God� (John 10:30, 33). Medieval Error? Probably the most widely held Christian view of God is known as the �trinity.� This popular belief teaches that the Godhead consists of three distinct persons who have existed together from eternity past and are named the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit. Each one possesses original, underived, and unborrowed life. They are all equally God and are one in nature, character, and purpose. They are not three �gods,� but one God in a combination of the three distinct persons. |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 16 July 2007 at 3:41pm
|
Islamispeace, Here is giving you more insight in to the matter. One God, Three Persons The names of God reveal attributes of His nature. God has a long-established habit of using various names to describe a person�s character. Jacob earned his name that means �swindler� when he practiced deception to steal his father�s blessing away from his brother Esau (Genesis 27:35, 36). At his conversion, Jacob wrestled with the angel and insisted on the blessing of God. Then his name was changed to �Israel,� which means �a prince with God� (Genesis 32:26�28). When you have the time, I would suggest studying the book of Daniel. |
Posted By: Douggg
Date Posted: 17 July 2007 at 7:08am
|
Hi Minuteman, The whole thing is wrong. The disciples worshipped him not throughout his ministry. Why they only started worshipping only at the last moment?? That is a false thing that they worshipped him at all or that he ever resurrected from the dead. He simply rose from the lying position. They said that Jesus had risen. What is the meaning of "Risen"! Please take the simplest meanings. Where do you get such an extreme idea? The disciples did not know that he was a god until the last few days. Why?? We see Jesus being called a Lord. But that does not mean that he is father or god. He could not be the father because he never got married. About Lord, I see many men in the House of Lords in England. Jesus is the Lord from heaven... meaning the in-form emanation of God, whose back Moses saw on Mt. Sinai. Haven't you ever heard of the Lord's prayer? It is the prayer the the Lord taught the disciples. It starts off, "Our Father who art in heaven...." In the KJV ot, God exists as visible, invisible, and ominpresent. Since God is a person, those three different ways are called the three persons of the Trinity. Moses saw the Lord's back on Mt. Sinai, as he passed by. God relates to man's perceptive capacities i.e. sight and hearing Another sentence that you wrote: Jesus never prayed to the Lord, because he was the Lord. That is also wrong because we see in the bibleNT that Jesus before his arrest, prayed so much heavily to God (Or his supposed father) that his sweat was running like blood and he beseeched his Lord (The real God) that if possible the cup may be taken away from him. Are you aware of these things?. If not then please go and check up or ask some one. Why did you say that Jesus did not pray to the Lord?? Then to whom he was praying?? To himself?? More later if required. But it is only for discussion. Not to undermine any one. Jesus never addressed God as Lord anywhere, anytime. Jesus addressed God as Father. The problem you have my friend minuteman is that you don't equate the trinity in terms of Father, Lord, and Holy Spirit. Unseen, Seen, and Omnipresent. I am certain that you have heard the trinity in terms as being Father, Son, Holy Spirit. However, the term "Son" , in the Trinity, is metaphoric, as is the Father for that matter. The Son's meaning is to convey that the Lord (the Son) emanates, comes forth, from the Father, God who no created being can fathom. God presents Himself in a form, such that His creation can relate. Simply substitute Lord for Son in the nt, and you will understand why Jesus is called the Lord throughout the nt and he himself never addressed God as Lord.... because Jesus was the Lord. The same Lord who's back Moses saw on Mt. Sinai. Peace, Doug L. |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 17 July 2007 at 8:27am
|
continued. Unity or Quantity? Most of the confusion regarding the number of beings composing the Godhead springs from a simple misunderstanding of the word �one.� Simply put, �one� in the Bible does not always mean numerical quantity. Depending on the Scripture, �one� can often mean unity. |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 17 July 2007 at 8:29am
|
God Manifested in Nature
Though there is nothing in this world that adequately illustrates God, Paul declares the �invisible things of him from the creation of the world� can help us understand �his eternal power and Godhead� (Romans 1:20). The truth that God is a �tri-unity� of two invisible persons (Father and Spirit) and one visible person (Jesus) is evident even in creation. When you read this you have to get a whole description of God. God tells us who He is through out the entire Bible. That is why I urge you to read it. |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 18 July 2007 at 3:54am
|
buddyman and douggg have tried to explain thieir church beliefs, that Lord means Jesus. According to what they say:God has triunie nature. There is God The father, There is god the son called Lord. There is a spirit of the father (HS). They (gods) have their own roles. They are not equal. Jesus was different to the father. Jesus came from father. The god has existed since eternity. But nobody knew about it until Jesus arrived. So Abraham and Moses and all the prophets after Moses did not know the triune nature of God and they never told any one or preached that doctrine. Nobody said that there are three gods in one god. The God of the Muslims needs nobody. But the God of the christians needs a spirit. He also needs a son too. We believe that any one who needs something cannot be a god at all/ It worries me that Jesus may have talked about thefather and the holy spirit and himself. But did Jesusever say that these three things are god or each one of them is a god. I believe that people made up agod from those three things. ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 18 July 2007 at 9:50am
|
minuteman wrote:Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 19 July 2007 at 10:16am
|
Question for Muslims to answer:
Why was my new topic about the Anti-Christ deleted? I never said it was Islam... |
Posted By: Aspiration
Date Posted: 20 July 2007 at 5:22am
|
Greetings to all, :) I am not sure if the original poster wrote the questions out himself/herself or if it was a copy and paste of another source. By finishing up the questions it seems the author questionig th bible is true. Is this a fair sumation of these questions? If so then yes it is. Now I will qualify this in that Christianity is not a faith of the book. Here is an example. What bible did Peter read? Or what version did Paul have or lets go further maybe even Ignatius? You see that Christianity started with Faith in the risen Lord and was not based on a book. I hope this helps your understanding.
|
Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 21 July 2007 at 8:25pm
------------- Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162) |
Posted By: Andalus
Date Posted: 21 July 2007 at 11:32pm
Your examples have proven an age old heresy of your church: modalism. There is nothing in nature that actually corresponds to the trinity, which is why your doctors have focused a great deal of effort writing volumes and volumes of work trying to explain why god should be a trinity more than how god actually is a trinity. PS Modalism is a heresy that goes against the trinity.
I have read the bible, and I have already given you my objections and arguments on at least two of the main prophecy evidences used by your faith, and you have simply brushed these off with, "you need to read the whole bible", or, "you just do not understand". With all due respect, taking into account the lack of your own "work", and the use of extremely low level sources to make your claims, I have to conclude that you do not know your bible very well, nor do you understand the more complicated theological ideas, if you did, you would be able to discuss your claims on a very different level. kindest regards ------------- A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah http://www.sunnipath.com http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/ http://www.pt-go.com/ |
Posted By: Aspiration
Date Posted: 22 July 2007 at 5:05am
|
Peace Islamispeace, I apologize for my delayed response. I did not realize you replied. You asked me clarify what I meant earlier by the faith not being a religion/faith of the book. Hopefully I can convey what I meant in regards to the question. Not trying to show you how it is correct simply answering the question. Simply put the faith of the early Christians had no book. The faith was passed down by a chain of believers. What chain you ask. The chain of the Apostolic fathers. The bible as we have it was not compiled to a much later date. Of course my Protestant brothers have the same version but with books not deemed inspired by them. The faith was taught. The Church is the Pillar and Foundation. Not vice versa. The faith believes from by scripture and tradition for they stem from the same divine well spring. If you refer to some of the scripture references you can see what I mean. 2 Thes 2:15, 2 Tim 2:1-2, 2 pet 1:20-21 Just a few examples. I hope you this answers your question. I didn't respond to this to see who was right or wrong. I am only giving an answer which is the title of this topic 60 questions for Christians. :) I answered the best I could. Islamispeace, Alaykum Salam. Nice writing and learning from you. In regards to Andalus I would have to agree that Modalism is being described. The view that the Three members of the Blessed Trinity are differnt modes of God is a heretical belief. No offense to you Buddyman. Only stating what the Modalism statement is. Peace be with you brother. Aspiration
|
Posted By: Andalus
Date Posted: 22 July 2007 at 10:18am
Greetings Aspiration. The latest, and probably the most clever approach to the trinity is entitled "Social Trinitarianism". William L. Craig is a huge proponent of the argument and has brought some strong work into the field. My understanding is that some Christian scholars have objected because the argument moves away from a biblical standpoint and relies too heavily on philosophy. With that in mind, as far as the trinity being rational or not, I have never used the "rational vs irrational" mode to denounce it. The idea of rejecting the existence of somethingbased upon the rationality of something was best summed up by Nietzsche: "The irrationality of a thing is no argument against its existence, rather a condition of it." Kindest regards ------------- A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah http://www.sunnipath.com http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/ http://www.pt-go.com/ |
Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 22 July 2007 at 11:52am
|
But in actuality brother Andalus Monarch Modalism is apart of the Christian theology although it remains subtle in its current form now. I remember doing a 20 page paper in my Medieval Philosophy course on Peter Abelard who fused the philosophical thought of Saballianism (i.e. Monarch Modalism) with Aristotlian thought. Like you said brother Andalus the biggest problem was as you said: explain why god should be a trinity more than how god actually is a trinity. The problem with Buddyman's position is he is saying "God is in nature" is the wrong approach. That would be Pan-tri-theism" like God is everything in three. That is illogical. Ascribing God as a hylomorphic compound in asymmetrical fashion is a blasphemous attempt to prove trinity. |
Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 22 July 2007 at 1:01pm
|
Hi Aspiration, Thank you for your explanation. Of course, I still find it rather confusing. You have confirmed that the Bible was not written until many years after Jesus, and hence no scripture existed in the early years of Christianity, even in parts. So, the story of Jesus was apparently preserved and spread verbatim. This story, you maintain, was passed along a chain of the "Apostolic fathers." OK. This sounds like the Hadiths in Islam, the prophetic traditions. But was this chain unbroken, as it was with the transmission of the Hadiths? Do you know who passed it through the years, from person to person? ------------- Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162) |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 23 July 2007 at 12:58pm
I don't believe I posted everything yet |
Posted By: Andalus
Date Posted: 23 July 2007 at 8:14pm
And then what? Lets look at your original copy and paste. Either what you wrote had problems, or did not have problems. I showed the problems as did others. Now, the only thing you can add is either an agreement that you made an error or material that further tries to assert that your error is true. You cannot copy and paste your way out of problems. regards ------------- A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah http://www.sunnipath.com http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/ http://www.pt-go.com/ |
Posted By: Andalus
Date Posted: 23 July 2007 at 8:24pm
Assalam aleikum Br. I was not aware that modalism is still a part of Christian theology. I thought the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics refuted the work enough so to show a difference between the trinity as opposed to their view of "modalism".
Like you said brother Andalus the biggest problem was as you said: explain why god should be a trinity more than how god actually is a trinity. The problem with Buddyman's position is he is saying "God is in nature" is the wrong approach. That would be Pan-tri-theism" like God is everything in three. That is illogical. Ascribing God as a hylomorphic compound in asymmetrical fashion is a blasphemous attempt to prove trinity. Indeed! Enjoyed your comments as always. ------------- A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah http://www.sunnipath.com http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/ http://www.pt-go.com/ |
Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 24 July 2007 at 1:08am
|
Wa alaikum Salaam brother Andalus, Yes Monarch Modalism is in some ways as expressed in Medieval Philosophy (and recycled now into its present philosophy) is in subtle form apart of Christian theology of the Trinity. Of course that is another thread but I enjoy your philosophical dialogue with Buddyman and the others but I pity them since, they are not in your class. |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 24 July 2007 at 9:14am
I don't believe you have read the Bible. No offense seriously, but I don't believe you. As for my post, I have told you I'm at work, I don't have my Bible with me or my notes, but I will make time to post my interpretation of the Book of Daniel like I said I would. Have a good day! |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 24 July 2007 at 9:17am
Funny you mention copy and pasting. I saw that you had copied and pasted on another thread, but I guess thats ok |
Posted By: Andalus
Date Posted: 24 July 2007 at 11:42am
Buddyman, either you are obtuse or you are puprosely trying to play difficult by equating an act within "reasonable" bounds, in contrast to an act that exceeds "reasonable" boundaries to the point where it is "unreasonable". 1) No one has said that you cannot "copy and paste" at all, or use material from the works of others. Using references, and pasting material in support of an argument is "reasonable". Allowing "copy and paste" material to represent 80 to 90% of what you think or beieve is "unreasonable". Using that same work to support your views is "reasonable". 2) Copy and pasting material to read, and for discussion is reasonable. 80% of a person's contributions that are made of purely "copy and paste" material, including repeating the material in other threads, is "unreasonable". 3) Copy and pasting work to discuss is reasonable. A pattern of ignoring people when they engage your material after they take the time to read it is "unreasonable". 4) Using copy and pasted material, with only, "I agree, because...."copy and pasted material"", or "I disagree, because, "copy and pasted material". This is "unreasonable". We are not here to refute our personally favorite websites, this is a discussion forum. If you find that the majority of your contribution requires people to constantly read and refute someone elses work, not that of the contributor, then common sense dictates that it is "unreasonable". I hope this clears things up. ------------- A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah http://www.sunnipath.com http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/ http://www.pt-go.com/ |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 26 July 2007 at 9:47am
|
Khairullah, I had asked for your permission to reply on IOL because you had asked Christians to respond. Can I? Please post a short note there. Thanks & Salaams BMZ ------------- Shasta's Aunt: "Well, there's the difference you see. The Bible was written by man about God, The Quran was revealed to man by God." |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 26 July 2007 at 9:50am
|
Buddyman: "PS Modalism is a heresy that goes against the trinity."
Trinity is itself a heresy. A heresy against Jesus and God. ------------- Shasta's Aunt: "Well, there's the difference you see. The Bible was written by man about God, The Quran was revealed to man by God." |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 26 July 2007 at 12:50pm
Unreasonable because you don't want to read it all not because I'm too lazy to type it all out myself..lol! |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 26 July 2007 at 12:58pm
Have you ever read the Book of Revelation? Jesus himself says he is the beginning and the end. Read Isaiah 44:6 to the end. Then read Revelation Chapter 1:17 & 18 Isaiah 41:4, Isaiah 44:6, Isaiah 48:12, Revelation 2:8, Revelation 22:13 etc... what of you're wrong? |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 31 July 2007 at 10:00am
|
By the way, can any Muslim here tell me how Jesus will return and how you will know it is him? I have heard several Muslims give the description below..... 1) Jesus will have a mustache 2.5 meters long Honetly I thought that was a joke, but I've heard this many times 2) Jesus will walk on water He already did that 3) A stone will fall somewhere in Arabia I'm sure many stones have fallen |
Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 31 July 2007 at 5:58pm
I have no idea where they got these "signs" from. Concerning the physical characteristics of Jesus (pbuh), we find the following ahadith in Sahih Muslim (Book 1, Number 317): �Abu al-'Aliya reported: Ibn Abbas, the son of your Prophet's uncle, told us that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had observed: On the night of my night journey I passed by Moses b. 'Imran (peace be upon him), a man light brown in complexion, tall. well-built as if he was one of the men of the Shanu'a, and saw Jesus son of Mary as a medium-statured man with white and red complexion and crisp hair, and I was shown Malik the guardian of Fire, and Dajjal amongst the signs which were shown to me by Allah. He (the narrator) observed: Then do not doubt his (i. e. of the Holy Prophet) meeting with him (Moses). Qatada elucidated it thus: Verily the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him), met Moses (peace be upon him).� Concerning the actual return of Jesus, we find the following ahadith, again from Sahih Muslim (Book 41, Number 7015): "�it would at this very time that Allah would send Christ, son of Mary, and he will descend at the white minaret in the eastern side of Damascus wearing two garments lightly dyed with saffron and placing his hands on the wings of two Angels. When he would lower his head, there would fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he would raise it up, beads like pearls would scatter from it. Every non-believer who would smell the odour of his self would die and his breath would reach as far as he would be able to see. He would then search for him (Dajjal) until he would catch hold of him at the gate of Ludd and would kill him." This ahadith is quite lengthy, so I have only quoted the portion relevant to your question. ------------- Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162) |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 04 August 2007 at 4:06am
Revelation has never impressed me, buddyman. That book has been in and out of the New Testament quite a few times. It is all John's wild imaginations, nothing truly from God and Jesus, just his dreams and visions. Have you ever read the Jewish Holy Scriptures, buddyman? After the declaration by the The Lord Almighty,"I am the First and I am the Last", no one can be given that title. John, plagiarised that brutally and changed it to "I am the Alpha and Omega" using Greek alphabets but that does not change the FACT that only the Lord Almighty God owns the Patent. BMZ ------------- Shasta's Aunt: "Well, there's the difference you see. The Bible was written by man about God, The Quran was revealed to man by God." |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 04 August 2007 at 4:11am
I will stay away from this as I believe that Jesus is not coming back. I don't even believe that he really walked on water. BMZ ------------- Shasta's Aunt: "Well, there's the difference you see. The Bible was written by man about God, The Quran was revealed to man by God." |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 10 August 2007 at 1:12pm
I thought you were Muslim?? |
Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 9:20pm
Buddyman, I read the book of Revelation and I didn't see any where that Jesus (S) said, he is the beginning an end. This is what it said:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201&version=9 - -4-5 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201:1&version=9 - The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he �sent and signified� it by his angel unto his servant John: �The Revelation of Jesus Christ� doesn�t mean �The Revelation �is� of Jesus Christ� It is �the Revelation of Jesus Christ telling us about things which must shortly come to pass.� Verse 3 conforms that �The Revelation of Jesus Christ� is �the word of Prophesy.� http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201:3&version=9 - Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.� And who give Jesus Christ (pbuh) the word of Prophesy or the Revelation? God Almighty! It�s nothing new, Jesus (pbuh) him self testifies in John 12:49:
�For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak." (John 12:49)
So! It�s the same thing in heaven: �The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God (Almighty) GIVE UNTO HIM� to do what? �to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass��
Now! God (Almighty) give him [Jesus (pbuh)], and what he did?
Rev.1 con.: and he (Jesus) SENT and SIGNIFIED it by his ANGEL unto his servant John.
Jesus (pbuh) didn�t come but he �SENT and SIGNIFIED it with an ANGEL unto John;� and who John saw? http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201:12-13&version=9 - - 12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201:13&version=9 - And in the midst of the seven candlesticks ONE LIKE UNTO THE SON OF MAN, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. �One like unto the Son of man� and not the son of man, It was an Angel that Jesus (pbuh) sent. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%20%201:1-2&version=9 - - 2 (John) Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw. Let�s look at Jesus (pbuh) testimony! Remember he told the disciples: �A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.� (John 16:16) "Going to the Father" here is referring to the sign of Jonah. Christians understand it to mean his death and resurrection. But he did not go to the Father " http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1063 - I http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=305 - not http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3768 - http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=305 - ( http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5758 - )" But he told Mary Magdalene to tell the disciples he did "I http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=305 - ( http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5719 - )" already died and resurrected. Read the entire verse: http://http/www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=joh+20%3A17§ion=0&it=kjv&oq=joh%252020%3A17&ot=bhs&nt=na&new=1&nb=joh&ng=20&ncc=20 - Jesus saith unto her, Toch me not; http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1063 - I http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=305 - not http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3768 - http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=305 - ( http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5758 - )" to my Father: but go to my bretheren, and say unto them, I http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=305 - ( http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5719 - ) unto my Father, and your Father; and my God, and your God. �Ascended� it mean, Going up. But he was standing just in front of Mary Magdalene. So that statement does not mean going to Heaven, he was referring to what he told the disciples earlier in John 16:16. �A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.� http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%20%201:3-5&version=9 - - 3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201:4-5&version=9 - -5 John to the seven churches which are in So who verse 4 is talking about, Jesus (pbuh)? No! Verse 5 says: ��And� from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness�� Jesus (pbuh) was only a �faithful witness�. How Christians didn�t see that? Rev.1:5 continue: �and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, That is a concoction. According to Jesus (pbuh) testimony above, he didn�t die. Rev.1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. By follow his true teachings. Rev.1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. �and every eye shall see him, they also which pierced him� That is another concoction. What is more evident is �they also which pierced him will see him� Are they still existed? http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%20%201:8&version=9 - - 8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. Who is this, Jesus (pbuh)? No! This verse tie into Rev.1:4 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%20%201:3-5&version=9 - �Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come (on judgment Day); and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; V. 5 �And� from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, You see? The verse is talking about , from him which is to come and the seven Spirits which are before his throne (the one who is to come);and Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, Let�s find out who really is on this throne. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%20%204&version=9 - And immediately I (John) was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne. Rev.4:3 And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald. Rev.4:4 And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold. Rev.4:5 And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God. Rev.4:6 And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind. What are these eyes? They are Spirits. Rev.5:6�and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. Rev.4:7 And the first beast was like a lion, and the second beast like a calf, and the third beast had a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like a flying eagle. Rev.4:8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, LORD God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come (on the day of Judgment). Rev.4:9 And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever, Rev.4:10 The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying, Rev.4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Now, Watch this!Revelation 5http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%205:1-7&version=9 - - 1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. You see that? The One that sits on the throne has a book; and what he did with it? Let�s find out. Rev.5:2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof? Rev.5: 3And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon. Rev.5:4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon. Rev.5:5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof. Rev.5:6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. Lamb as �it had been slain� (concoction) Rev.5:7And he (the Lamb) came and took the book out of the right hand of him (God Almighty) that sat upon the throne. Who took the book out of the right hand of him that sat on the throne? The Lamb! And who is sitting on the throne? God Almighty! How you didn�t see that? Nothing new! It�s all in Revelation 1:1 Rev.1:1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God (Almighty) gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: �For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak." (John 12:49)
truthnowcome ------------- LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES! |
Posted By: buddyman
Date Posted: 14 August 2007 at 10:40am
|
Truth, I posted on this thread: http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10006&PN=1 - http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10006&am p;PN=1 |