IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Religion - Islam > Interfaith Dialogue
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Question For Open ( Debate For Christian
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Question For Open ( Debate For Christian

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 11>
Author
Message
bunter View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 March 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 123
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bunter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 March 2011 at 9:06am
Originally posted by IessEI999 IessEI999 wrote:

Care Share What You Know About Saul, Shaool, Paul, Teaching?


Where can we start? How about this teaching that he gave in Romans Romans 1:16-17 (NIV)

16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. 17. For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”      

Edited by bunter - 31 March 2011 at 9:08am
Back to Top
chall0121 View Drop Down
Starter
Starter
Avatar

Joined: 31 March 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chall0121 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 March 2011 at 12:09pm
It is my understanding that the virgin birth is a Scriptural truth to be accepted by faith.  There isn't any proof.  The point is that Jesus is both man and God.  The concept is that God "fused" His own being with full humanity in the womb of Mary.  Thus Jesus is a man, who is also God by virtue of union with the Father. 
 
Paul expressed that the Law was just and holy.  It is an expression of God's own holiness.  Yet the Law was never intended to be obeyed to bring the necessary righteousness for salvation.  Only ABSOLUTE perfection can earn Heaven.  That means that if one commits a single sin... that person is disqualified from going to Heaven forever.  That is how serious sin is.  Jesus, who is believed to be both man and God, is believed to be absolutely perfect.  Through the cross, Jesus Christ willingly died in the believer's place, taking the wrath of God upon Himself, fulfilling God's judgment against sin.  Just as Jesus took our sinfulness upon Himself (every last sin that has been committed and will be committed), Jesus imputes His own absolute righteousness upon the believer.  The believer is then seen by God clothed in Christ's righteousness, absolute perfection, being hidden from judgment. 
 
So Paul didn't necessarily abolish the Law.  Paul simply expressed the Law's ultimate purpose in revealing God's holiness, the requirement for Heaven, and how it relates to Christ's righteousness as imputed to the believer. 
 
At least... that's my understanding of it.  lol 


Edited by chall0121 - 31 March 2011 at 1:54pm
Back to Top
IssaEl999 View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Avatar

Joined: 10 March 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 336
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IssaEl999 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 March 2011 at 6:03pm
Originally posted by chall0121 chall0121 wrote:

It is my understanding that the virgin birth is a Scriptural truth to be accepted by faith.  There isn't any proof.  The point is that Jesus is both man and God.  The concept is that God "fused" His own being with full humanity in the womb of Mary.  Thus Jesus is a man, who is also God by virtue of union with the Father. 
 
Paul expressed that the Law was just and holy.  It is an expression of God's own holiness.  Yet the Law was never intended to be obeyed to bring the necessary righteousness for salvation.  Only ABSOLUTE perfection can earn Heaven.  That means that if one commits a single sin... that person is disqualified from going to Heaven forever.  That is how serious sin is.  Jesus, who is believed to be both man and God, is believed to be absolutely perfect.  Through the cross, Jesus Christ willingly died in the believer's place, taking the wrath of God upon Himself, fulfilling God's judgment against sin.  Just as Jesus took our sinfulness upon Himself (every last sin that has been committed and will be committed), Jesus imputes His own absolute righteousness upon the believer.  The believer is then seen by God clothed in Christ's righteousness, absolute perfection, being hidden from judgment. 
 
So Paul didn't necessarily abolish the Law.  Paul simply expressed the Law's ultimate purpose in revealing God's holiness, the requirement for Heaven, and how it relates to Christ's righteousness as imputed to the believer. 
 
At least... that's my understanding of it.  lol 
 
 
Thankyou For Your Answer ( chall )
 
If Saul , Shaool , Paul was going to teach the Gentiles then he should have been converting them to the teaching and the laws of the person whom he claimed to be receiving all of these visions from . For Example ;
 
Yashu'a , Isa , Jesus Said ; Keep the Sabbath ( Mark 2 ; 27 ) circumcise male children on the 8th day ( Luke 2 ; 21 ) .
Saul , Shaool , Paul ; Circumcision is not necessary ( Romans 2 ; 26 ) all you need is '' circumcison of the heart '' ( Romans 2 ; 29 ) that is going against what Jesus Christ said in John 7 ; 22 - 23 . The word ANTI meaning , '' to go against '' so Anti - Christ means to go against anything that Jesus Christ taught .
Yashu'a , Isa , Jesus Said ; Unless you are baptized you shall not see the kingdom of God ( John 3 ; 3 -5 ) .
Saul , Shaool , Paul ; You are saved by accepting Jesus ; he does not mention Baptism ( Roman 10 ; 9 - 10 ) .
The Law of Mosheh , Musa , Moses says ; In 2Chronicles 7 ; 12 - 16 , it says that , the Lord dwells in chosen temples , a law through Mosheh , Musa , Moses ,
Saul , Shaool , Paul says ; in Acts 7 ; 48 , '' The Most High does not dwell in temples , '' God dwells in light in 1Timothy 6 ; 16 says Saul , Shaool , Paul
Saul , Shaool , Paul says ; Anger is approved by him in Ephesians 4 ; 26 , as well as , in Proverbs 22 ;24 .
The Law of Mosheh , Musa , Moses says ; It is law that every man - child be circumcised in Genesis 17 ; 10 ,
 Saul , Shaool , Paul says ; You will gain nothing if you are circumcised in Galatians 5 ; 2 .
The Law of Mosheh , Musa , Moses says ; Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy in Exodus 20 ; 8 ,
 Saul , Shaool , Paul says ;Don't judge a man who does not keep the Sabbath in Romans 14 ; 5 And Colossians 2 ; 16 ,
 The Law of Mosheh , Musa , Moses says ; Do not eat pork in Leviticus 11 ; 7 , And the swine , though he divide the hoof . and be cloven footed , yet he cheweth not the cud ; he is unclean to you , '' Saul , Shaool , Paul says ; You can eat anything in Roman 14 ; 2 , '' For one believeth that he may eat all things ; another , who is weak , eateth herbs ,
 
Saul , Shaool , Paul even went against the Baptism 1Corinthians 1; 14 , 17 , And I Quote ; I thank God ( Theos , Elohyeem ) that I baptized none of you , but Crispus and Gaius ( 17 ) For Christ sent me not to baptize , but to preach the gospel ; not wisdom of words , lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect , '' which Yashu'a , Isa , Jesus , himself was given by Yowkhanan Yahya , John ( Baptist ) . Make not that Yowkhanan Yahya , John ( Zebedee ) still spoke of Baptism after Saul , Shaool , Paul's statement because his books came later , Yet , still in John 1 ; 26 , it says '' John answered them , saying , I Baptize with water ; but there standeth one among you , whom ye know not .
 
Mark 1; 9 , And I Quote ' And it came to pass in those days , that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was Baptized of John in Jordan .
 
John 1 ; 33 , And I Quote ; And I knew him not ; but he that sent me To Baptize with water , the same said unto me , Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining on him , the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost .
 
 John 4 ; 1 , And I Quote When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and Baptized more Disciples that John .
 
And Saul , Shaool , Paul is going against Yashu'a , Isa , Jesus and makes a false statement by saying , '' For Christ Sent Me Not To Baptize .... '' Christ DID NOT SENT PAUL ... CHRIST NEVER KNEW PAUL ,.. This Is A Historical And Undisputable Fact . And when And Saul , Shaool , Paul , claimed in Acts 28 ; 28 that '' The salvation of God ( Theos , Elohyeem ) is sent unto the Gentiles and they will hear it '' . This is not True ,  Saul , Shaool , Paul is the Apostle of the Gentiles Only ,
 
 
More In Next Verse .
 
El's Holy Qur'aan , States In Chapter 17 ; 81 , '' And Say ; Truth Has ( Now ) Arrived , And Falsehood Perished ; For Falsehood Is ( By Its Nature ) Bound To Perish (81 ) .
Back to Top
honeto View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 March 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2487
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote honeto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 March 2011 at 6:51pm
Chall,
welcome to the forum. I have several issues with what you wrote, but as always I take one at a time.
You wrote: " The point is that Jesus is both man and God. "
Where did that come from and how is that different from similar claims by other religions that you probably do not accept, the Hindu concept in particular where God is told to have come down in various forms, both as man and animal. Also it does raise another valid question. Why during the period covering the OT prophets God is never mentioned to have come down in form of one of His own creation? Nowhere in the OT I find where awaited Massiah was told to be God himself.
So, those are some valid questions besides the fact that except in Pagan believes God does not come in form of One of His Creations. That's what makes Him God, Unique, None like Him, if only we can grasp the differance between what is created vs Who is the Creator, we can refrain from saying such BS. as Jesus is both man and God, or God came as an elephant like a Hindu believes.
Hasan
 
BS=Blasphemy


Edited by honeto - 31 March 2011 at 6:56pm
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"
Back to Top
IssaEl999 View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Avatar

Joined: 10 March 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 336
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IssaEl999 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2011 at 7:32am
Originally posted by honeto honeto wrote:

Chall,
welcome to the forum. I have several issues with what you wrote, but as always I take one at a time.
You wrote: " The point is that Jesus is both man and God. "
Where did that come from and how is that different from similar claims by other religions that you probably do not accept, the Hindu concept in particular where God is told to have come down in various forms, both as man and animal. Also it does raise another valid question. Why during the period covering the OT prophets God is never mentioned to have come down in form of one of His own creation? Nowhere in the OT I find where awaited Massiah was told to be God himself.
So, those are some valid questions besides the fact that except in Pagan believes God does not come in form of One of His Creations. That's what makes Him God, Unique, None like Him, if only we can grasp the differance between what is created vs Who is the Creator, we can refrain from saying such BS. as Jesus is both man and God, or God came as an elephant like a Hindu believes.
Hasan
 
BS=Blasphemy
 
 
As Salaamu Alaykum  ... I Agree With The Above , These People Can't Shake The Trinity . No Matter How Many Time , Your Or I Try To It Plan It .
 
 
There Is No Way To Have A Trinity Without First Separating Each Of The Three Things Indivdually To Declare Then A Trinity . By That I Mean , You Have To First Establish That There Is A Father One Thing And A Son Another Thing And A Holy Ghost The Thrid Thing , In order For These
 
Things To Totally Mix And Become One Thing . They Would Have To Start Off Equal In Rank , Quantity . Space , Density , Authority , Or Existence . In Admitting That The Son Came From The Father , Time Make The Difference , The Father Would Have To Had Been First , Before The Son .
 
This Would Make Them Unequal And Incapable Of Becoming A Balanced Triad . No It Did Not Mean That When It Said God The Father ,,, God The Son , And God The Holy Ghost = One God .. Because Three Cannot Go Into One .
 
Now If They Can't See This ( Their Lost )
El's Holy Qur'aan , States In Chapter 17 ; 81 , '' And Say ; Truth Has ( Now ) Arrived , And Falsehood Perished ; For Falsehood Is ( By Its Nature ) Bound To Perish (81 ) .
Back to Top
bunter View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 March 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 123
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bunter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2011 at 7:38am
Originally posted by honeto honeto wrote:

You wrote: " The point is that Jesus is both man and God." Where did that come from and how is that different from similar claims by other religions that you probably do not accept, the Hindu concept in particular where God is told to have come down in various forms, both as man and animal. Also it does raise another valid question. Why during the period covering the OT prophets God is never mentioned to have come down in form of one of His own creation? Nowhere in the OT I find where awaited Massiah was told to be God himself.

This is a fair but difficult question and no Christian will say other that God is one. But in the NT we frequently read that Jesus claims to be one with God. For example we read in John 10:28-32 NIV "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” Thus Jesus here claims to be God and who but God can redeem us?

Now a common objection to the idea that God is one in three and three in one is that it cannot be understood and of course I agree with that but at the same time I do not make my own mind the measure of all things and I accept in faith the triune God.

To see what I mean here about setting limits with our puny minds I might ask you what does it mean if God is one, without equals etc. Does it mean he sits in a chair somewhere and I can identify him as one person or is he everywhere or what? If he is one person in the sense that we might understand it how can he listen to a billion prayers and in the case of Islam listen to a billion people all saying the same prayers and saying it several time over. If God is everywhere its then hard to see he is one?

Edited by bunter - 01 April 2011 at 7:46am
Back to Top
bunter View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 March 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 123
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bunter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2011 at 7:42am
Originally posted by Matt Browne Matt Browne wrote:

Modern enlightened Christians don't believe virgin birth to be a biological fact. Jesus, the human being, had a biological father too. Immaculate conception can have a symbolic meaning.Modern enlightened Muslims don't believe in the physical night journey of Muhammad. This too has a symbolic meaning.

Perhaps you will tell us by what means we can look through scripture and know that one thing is symbolic and another is not?

Edited by bunter - 01 April 2011 at 7:42am
Back to Top
bunter View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 March 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 123
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bunter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2011 at 8:03am
Originally posted by IssaEl999 IssaEl999 wrote:

Thankyou For Your Answer (chall. If , Paul was going to teach the Gentiles then he should have been converting them to the teaching and the laws of the person whom he claimed to be receiving all of these visions from. For Example;Keep the Sabbath (Mark 2;27) circumcise male children on the 8th day Luke 2;21)...

Issa, I think its time you actually added something to the discussion, so far all you have done is copy what can be found in other placers. In this particular post it comes from http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/general-religious-discussions/38519-pauls-christianity-vs-jesus-christianity-m-z-york.html and it says there that it is the work of someone called M. Z. York whose posting you can find all over the place and his work is known as Nuwaubianism.

If you want more if this rubbish go and read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuwaubianism


Edited by bunter - 01 April 2011 at 8:05am
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 11>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.