All true prophets (from the bible & Torah) prophesied revealing Gods message, but did Muhammad?
Jesus, the last prophet said, It is Finished! John 19:30
So, would a TRUE prophet of God have time to prophesy if he:
Wages war, raids caravans, kill & mutilate hundreds, own slaves, have 10+ wives, marry a 6 yr old child, kidnap/ransom & worship other gods? No. Not a true prophet of God. Muhammad then, is a prophet of Satan. Satan, hence, helped Muhammad create Islam to deceive the world.
Jesus never said he was the last proper but he supposed to have said he would ask his father to send some one to speak the truth and he would guide you into whole truth. So Jesus was not the last Prophet. BTW you said he was your God how come he become a prophet. Is God a job? Yeah prophet of Satan came along with the message that Jesus is God, that Satan was Paul. You fucktard read your fucking Bible then you know all your prophets have done worse things than Muhammad.
Well, when you look at the action of the Prophets in the Bible the actions of Muhammad show that he is the true Prophet and all the other prophets in the Bible are false. Most of the were immoral and ungodly. For an instance Lot he was screwed by his two daughters. Jesus said another comforter, means he considers himself a comforter. Holy spirit never guided anyone into at least one new truth but betrayed Christians whole sale.
I dont know why, but I tried & tried to post but couldnt!
Would be nice if YT would let us know why we cant post, sometimes!
I do not block anyone or advice anyone not to post a personal message or even post it on my profile unless someone is a filthy rag. If you can't post it post it to me personally but I do prefer to post it on the thread but sometimes PM is necessary when you can help it.
In fact all most all the Christian world misunderstands the Bible as the word of God because the Bible doesn't say that it is from God but they believe that it is from God. Bible means library of books.
Muhammed gave up his 1st two gods Al-Rahman & Ar-Rahim to worship Quraysh idols & 3 daughters Al-Alat, Al-Uzzah & Manat.
Quran 4:48 states allah has NO partners! Yet, Quran 4:64 & 65 state Muhammed is!
2nd, Quran states Jesus is judge (Bukhari: V4B55N657 & Bukhari: V4B55N658) as does bible John 5:22 So, what happened to allah? 'ilah' is the arabic word for god & allah is Muhammeds Quraysh gods name.
I don't think with that of the pagan mindset, you can understand anything. Ar-Rahamn and Ar-Raheem are not gods, they are attributes of God there are 99 attributes of God in the Qur'an. Allah is the name of the God in Arabic which Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and all the others worshiped day and night. The other name you mentioned are the 360 idols of your forefathers which Muhammad (S) destroyed.
Muhammed settled in on the Quraysh idols & its 3 daughters.
Islam continues pagan traditions of the Quraysh by kissing the Black Stone to circumambulating it 7 times!
Islam has only 1 prophet, Muhammed. Islam claims ALL prophets from bible/torah are theirs too but that is impossible b/c Islam was founded 1,400 yrs ago. Even Muhammads parents were NOT muslim!
AdorIslam: The Bible IS inspired word of God. Meaning that Christians recognize it as a written by men, but these men were inspired by God. God did not write the Bible himself, he used his people to carry out his message and record them. Isn't Quran written in the same way? Allah or Gabriel didn't write it, themselves did they? Funny, how it's acceptable for Quran but not acceptable for the Bible?
AdorIslam: The Bible IS inspired word of God. Meaning that Christians recognize it as a written by men,
It is funny that he inspire idiots to write his book but as we know he spoke to Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammad and revealed the message to them. God doesn't inspire men to write what God wants he reveals. People who claim that they are inspired are also telling us they wrote those stories because at that time everybody was writing. Read your Bible carefully before you commit.
AdorIslam: The Bible IS inspired word of God. Meaning that Christians recognize it as a written by men, but these men were inspired by God. God did not write the Bible himself,
I must say you have a beautiful name. BTW God never wrote any book himself but he is the one who taught man to write an also created everything that exist, including the god that you worship instead worshiping him. Let me as you Behunchud is it so difficult to worship one God who created everything?
So here you admit that God never wrote any book himself, which is exactly what I was saying. So when you say it's God's Word! you're actually saying God's inspired Word through men!. AdorIslam, you are wrong if you think that Christians do not worship ONE God. But I don't blame you, you have been fed this lie for centuries why would you believe me now. Let me ask you can God do anything? Is God all powerful? If yes, then is it impossible for God to come to earth in human form? Think carefully.
It is obvious that God's oneness differs from man's oneness. Man's oneness makes him limited. Thus it is not possible for one man to be in two places at the same time. But God can be on His throne in heaven and, at the same time, be here on this earth. This is neither impossible nor difficult for God. And we do not mean that part of Him is in heaven while the other part is on the earth. We mean that God, in all His glory, can be on His throne in heaven and at the same time be here on this earth.
This is exactly what happened when Christ came to this earth. The Bible states clearly that in Christ "dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily". This is what we call the Incarnation.We have heard of great men and kings who wore poor people's clothes and went to visit the poor in their homes without taking servants with them in order not to frighten the poor and in order to see their needs and to help them. We admire such great men, and praise them for their humility and nobility.
Before Christ ascended to heaven, He commanded His disciples saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:18,19). Notice that He did not say to them, "in the names of the Father and the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." He said, "in the name" because it is one name—the glorious name of the one and only true and living God.
But you Adorislam might object and say, "How can that be? How can three be one?" This objection rises from the great error in trying to apply the rules of physics and mathematics to the Godhead. Herein lies the mistake and the cause of the perplexity. The Almighty God, who created nature and imposed on it rules of mathematics and other natural laws, is Himself not under such laws. We cannot, and should not, apply the laws of created material to spiritual issues.
AdorIslam: If your intention is to offend me somehow, you failed. God didn't inspire "idiots" to write his book, he did however inspire people from all walks of life to give his message. Meaning, they could be rich, poor, non-believers, etc. This does not discourage me in my faith, rather it encourages me. Knowing that God can choose anyone! (even me) to do his work. Yes "....God reveals" but how? THROUGH MEN & WOMEN!.
AdorIslam: If your intention is to offend me somehow, you failed. God didn't inspire "idiots" to write his book,
God can choose anyone to do his work, true but he chooses whom he will. That is where the problem came The Jews were really for the message but the Arabs at that time were not for the message but for the man. His own uncles and relatives were against him because why Muhammad why not me, this was the pagan question? God revealed his messages through his messages.
The person on the cross said that " Oh my God, Oh my God why have you forsaken me" So the game is over here because here it is not Jesus. And before his supposed ascension, he would request his father (God) to sent someone who will teach the his followers al the truth which he did not teach. If he is true it is Muhammad not any stupid Holy Spirit which betraying the Christians.
Jesus took upon Himself all the sins of the world. Even tho His Father was with Him, He left Jesus b/c of the sins . God the Father will NOT allow sin in His presence. Jesus felt His father leaving Him & cried out,
You keep saying allah! WHICH ALLAH? CHOOSE! Which pagan diety is your Islamic allah?
AdorIslam: If you admit that God can choose whom he wills, then you shouldn't have any problem with accepting the Bible and the writers of the the Bible. Especially, when Islam orginated 600 years after the Bible and Torah and no one for those 600 years or so had any issues with either of the two or it's writers.
Yes he chooses whom he will that doesn't mean he will choose anybody. Of course Islam came some 600 years later because God chose the seed of Ishmael 600 years later, same way Jesus was chosen some thousands of years later does that make Jesus a false prophet? You are wrong Bible was not with the people. It carried death penalty to possess a copy of the Bible. Bible is with the people only a few centuries ago. So in between who played...
AdorIslam: "...that doesn't mean he will choose anybody..." Now you claim to know what God can and cannot (or will not) do? God DID not choose the seed of Ishmael. Where did you get that? I don't know what you are talking about that "...carried death penalty..." care to explain?
I disagree that God can choose anyone to do his work. Correct position here is that God can forgive anyone provided he is not an idol worshiper or Jesus worshiper. At the same time you say Muhammad is not the Prophet. The problem is when you are misguided you speak crap. Here you put your trust in somebody else who says Jesus is God where Jesus never said anything but others say these things. You are talking about Injeele markus, Lucus but I want Injeele Esa. Don't be a machooth
AdorIslam: "I disagree that God can choose anyone to do his work..." Are you certain of that? According to YOUR Islam, Muhammad was a pagan worshiper as a child but then became a prophet of God (according to you not me). Secondly, I don't put trust in what "others" have said about Jesus, Jesus did say in many occasions that he is God or God like, so who am I to argue with him? Sorry, but there is no evidence anywhere that there was an "injeel Isa", unless you can prove otherwise!
Al-Rahman & Ar-Rahim may be attributes but they are also REAL gods Muhammed once worshipped. Allah was NEVER in the bible, hence it is impossible for Abraham, Moses or Jesus to be muslim or worship allah. Islam, the pagan religion, was created 1,400 yrs ago by Muhammed, its one & ONLY prophet!
Re: In fact all most all the Christian world misunderstands the Bible
True, because it is not the book that God revealed to any of the prophet but yet you find some verses supposed to be from God and his messengers found in there. I want you to clearly quote the verses so that others can read. You have just posted some references that doesn't make any references. Can you post a single verse where Jesus says that he is God and everyone should worship him?
You don't produce questions in factories, these are legitimate questions which Christians have not produced answers. Well, Qur'an is clear in saying Jesus is one of the servants of God and God is the God of all the gods and also Qur'an says that it is the mother of all the books. Allah is the Lord of the worlds and Muhammad is mercy to the worlds. Show me Jesus said something like it. In fact Youtube is not the place to debate with 500 character. Why not debate personally.
AdorIslam: "...Christians have not produced answers". Please refer to one of my videos watch?v=FRK48eYOC5M for the response to this very question. You can feel free to debate me anytime. I have created a free forum called islam vs christianity . freeforums . org. You may post your arguments there. I have added a few categories, but if you have other please let me know and I will add them.
AdorIslam: "...Christians have not produced answers". Please refer to one of my videos watch?v=FRK48eYOC5M for the response to this very question.
You have not understood what I said. You have not produced a single answer to what we have been saying but you keep saying the same thing over and over again. Let me make it simple, Produce a saying of Jesus where he says I am God and worship me, produce a gospel that Jesus left behind. What you do is you quote someone else.
We are not interested in what Luke said or mark said or some of the so called prophecies that you want to boast. When he was on the cross he accused God of betrayal which means he did not know he was to be sacrificed by his God for your sin. Where is your proof or evidence that he really died for your sins. In fact that was the Gospel of Paul not the Gospel of Jesusl: (Timothy II 2:8): Remember the Jesus Christ of seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel."
AdorIslam: What you should be really saying is that "We are not interested to see or hear the truth". The "So called prophecies" that you easily discard were all fulfilled by Christ yet you still want prove? As for him accusing God of betrayal, where did you get that from? If you are referring to his last words, please check Psalm 22 in the Old Testament, Jesus was quoting it on the cross and then ask yourself the question.
AdorIslam: If you had bothered to view my video you would have got your answer. The point is that it does not matter whether Christ said those words literally "I am God and worship me", but rather he made many indirect comments which are just as clear. Tell me if a man comes to you and says that I am God, would you believe him? Why then would you want to hear it from Jesus when you are not going to believe it anyways?
Excellent work, here...indeed, every part of John 8 is consistently misquoted by all who reject the message of Jesus. John 8:58 is such a blatant admission of divinity by Jesus that all non-believers in the Son of God become convicted when confronted by this one sentence...
Jesus, God the Son, emphatically stated that before Abraham was, "I AM," equating Himself with God in power, majesty and honesty. There is nowhere to hide from this, and one must believe in Him or not believe. God bless.
Peter: You claim that you had read the Bible. Well, then how you aren't aware of the exact same situation as Numbers 20 that occurred in Exodus 17? What did Moses do in this instance?
Peter: You never really answered my question, "if I believe it for a second that God was wroth with Moses for the sake of his people and so he punished him instead of his people, then how do you explain Exodus 4? By your reasoning since God was wroth with Moses here alone, doesn't that mean that he CAN and has been wroth with Moses in other instances?
Peter: No you didn't. Your reasoning is that since in one of the instances Moses claimed that God was wroth with him for the sake of others so in any other instances (before or after) it is understood that it would ALWAYS be this case. But I already showed you that God in Exodus 4 was ONLY wroth with Moses so by YOUR theory now we (really you) should consider that is is possible that God CAN be wroth with Moses for his sin(s).
Peter: It's not an assertion. I know God can do anything which is why I stand by what I said that Moses was not immune to God's wrath. God CAN and HAS reprimanded Moses for HIS sins. The evidence is quite clear, you on the other hand want to believe in something totally untrue just because it fits YOUR assumption that Moses never sinned and was perfect.
You are saying that "this *IS* what I think it is. It is not something else and cannot be something else, and anything other than that is absolutely wrong"
Please explain to me how that is not an assertion.
Peter: Another interesting thing that I found in your so called "evidence" is if you keep reading the passage of Deuteronomy 3 you will notice how your interpretations are incorrect. Yes the verse 26 does say " But because of you the LORD was angry with me and would not listen to me...." but if you finish this passage you will also see verse 28 where God says ..."But commission Joshua, ... for he will lead this people across and will cause them to inherit the land that you will see."
So my question is this: If what you say is true and God wanted to punish or teach the people a lesson and that is why he punished Moses in Numbers 20 then why would still let the people see the promised land but NOT Moses? In fact God wants Joshua to lead them there. Why God our father give his children mixed messages?
This is but an example of the mercy of God. It was not punishment for punishment's sake, but a lesson for the sake of teaching people for thousands of years.
Peter: Now you are just bordering on absurdity. Think God as a parent and we all as his children, if your parent wanted to teach you a lesson why would he let you into the promised land and punish someone totally who is not guilty? By commissioning Joshua and denying Moses God is giving a totally different message than what you believe.
You know, all this great second-guessing what God would do and why really has nothing to do with the fact that the evidence is there and the scripture shows certain things. You're at the point where you're hypothetically attempting to point out God's supposed motivations from your point of view.
Peter: Literal yes but not an absolute interpretation. God did want to teach his people and the future generations to come that even though Moses was one of the most beloved and faithful servant of God even then he is not immune from God's punishment if he disbeliefs or let pride rule him.
So you say "not absolute", does that mean that you are open to the possibility that your interpretation is wrong and that it is not literal, or that it is not absolutely literal only partially so, or some third option?
Peter: you misunderstand me for the umpteenth time. I already explained to you why that is but since it escaped you completely I will try again. God in his infinite wisdom and mercy punish Moses for the sins HE committed, which was also a lesson for the rest of the people. The lesson is quite simple, 1) Trust in God 2) Do not make yourself equal to God. Moses is guilty on both accounts.
when i read the book of Genesis , it didn't cross my mind that Adam was a prophet. how is that he is prophet.? what is his prophesy.? if Adam is a prophet, then i bet Virgin Mary the mother of God is a prophet as well.
It's quite simple really. In Numbers 20 God says "12 But the LORD said to Moses and Aaron, "Because you did not trust in me enough to honor me as holy in the sight of the Israelites, you will not bring this community into the land I give them."" and then again in verse 24 he reiterates " "Aaron will be gathered to his people. He will not enter the land I give the Israelites, because both of you rebelled against my command at thewaters of Meribah." how can you get that this wasmeant from others?
Peter: I am not denying that God can be wroth with Moses and Aaron for the sins of Israelites. I am sure it's possible, but in THIS instance it wasn't so. I am not making assumptions based on speculations but on the evidence found in the Bible and in verse 12 combined with verse 24. Now answer me this, was Moses so perfect that God can never be upset/wroth/angry with him only? Question number wasn't God only angry with Moses in Exodus 4? So why can't it be true in this instance?
Peter: Now whose making assumptions and assertions without any evidence? Your reasoning makes no sense Peter. So what you are saying just because Moses and Aaron were representatives of their people, God would always rebuke them in order to teach them a lesson? As for your second point that is one of the differences between Islam/Bahai and Christianity, as holy as close to God Moses we do not consider him to be perfect. Bible tells us that no one is perfect except for one Jesus.
Peter: You haven't given my any evidence. All you have said is that based on what Moses said to his people in ANOTHER instance. The incident mentioned in Numbers 20 occurs before the incident in Deuteronomy. It's not an assertion but a Bible fact.
The fact that it was another instance is irrelevant. It sets a precedent, that God would and had done something, that Moses did and had acted in that manner in the past, establishing that it was, in fact, possible in such a situation. You have provided no evidence that this was not such a situation save that it was "another instance".
Peter: The fact that it was another instance is not irrelevant. Perhaps for you who so desperately are trying to convince me that Moses was sinless. If you are correct then when God was wroth Moses and Moses alone in Exodus 4 then that would too set a precedent. Explain that!
Howso? Where does it say "I am wroth with you specifically not as any form of representation of the sins of your people and what I am saying right here is not that either"
Seriously, we've established that when He has been wroth with Moses it has been as a representation of His people. What you haven't established is any proof that all other instances haven't followed that same pattern in symbolic language.
Peter: The same can be flipped around at you and said that "where does GOD says that God is wroth with Moses for the sake of his people"? You have only established that Moses said that God was wroth with him for the sake of his people. Seriously, Peter it's not symbolic at all! God was wroth with Moses for HIS sin not for the sin of the people. And YES Moses did sin when he put himself in equal with God. Which is why he was denied entrance but people under Joshua's command were not.
When Moses gathered the people for this miracle, he just snapped. Proud self-confidence and self-sufficiency. His pride demeaned and belittled others; he called them rebels. His pride glorified himself by usurping Gods role in giving them the water; must we (me and Aaron) fetch water out of the rock. His pride made him think he knew better than God; by using his own method to extract the water rather than Gods. His pride made him lose his temper; by violently lashing out at the rock.
Do you see how even the greatest believers can also be great unbelievers. How often God must say to you as he said to Moses: You believed me not. And, if you have knowledge of your own heart you will cry, I believe, help thou mine unbelief. Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin (Heb.3:12-13).
Peter: Yes he was adept but at the same time he too was sinful just like the rest of us. He too was imperfect and if you read the Bible you will see that.
Peter: Really! If you still claim that Moses was perfect than how do you explain Exodus 4:14 (Why is God angry here?)?, or Exodus 2:11 & 14? (Is Moses proud and happy about his actions?), or Numbers 20:10-12, then 24 (These ones also show Moses very human nature). Perhaps you should read it again and this time more closely.
I have done as you asked and gone back, again, and reread all of those, again. I have carefully gone over each sentence and then some.
As I am neither the Master nor the Guardian, I am not qualified to interpret authoritatively the scriptures of God, and as I am unaware of specific explanations of those exact verses I cannot interpret them for you. But, I can and shall comment on them.
Why is it that you restrict yourself to one absolute interpretation of those verses?
Peter: So if you as seeing how you put it that you are "unaware of specific explanations of those exact verses..." couldn't it be possible that my explanation could very well be valid? The reason why I believe it (my interpretation) to be true is because, the evidence supports it, both interpretations can't be true (meaning Moses can't be a sinner and a "not sinner") at the same time.
Peter: You cannot explain these verses which I quoted to you, and hide behind your Master and Guardian, yet you are quick to reject my explanations when I have and can clearly interpret them for you. Do you think that's fair? That's like saying "your answer is incorrect!, but I don't know the answer either, I just know that you are wrong". It doesn't take a scholar to interpret these verses or the Bible for that matter all you need is an open mind.
Peter: We can take each verse separately and one at a time if you so wish. Why do you think in Exodus 4 God gets angry with Moses? And more importantly is he really angry with Moses?
On another note, if the rebuke was directed towards the people and not to Moses and Aaron then why does God says "Because YOU did not trust in me enough to honor me as holy..." and "AARON will be gathered to his people. HE will not enter the land I give the ISRAELITES, because BOTH OF YOU rebelled against my command..." (Caps are mine) In both verses God is quite clear as to who he is referring to.
Once again, if Moses was a representative of His people then it makes sense that He would be addressed.
Like it said before "the Lord was WROTH WITH ME for your sakes".
So repeating that it says He was mad at Moses **does not matter**, because it has already been established that He would be mad at Moses **for their sakes**
Peter: Sure I am not denying that Moses was representing his people. But, God in any instance tells Moses that he is wroth with him for the wrong doings of the people. Or does he? Can you provide me this evidence from the Bible? When you say well he said "the Lord was wroth with me..." what you are actually saying is that Moses said that to his people, based on his interpretations of God's message. I am fine with Moses claiming this, but in Numbers 20 neither God or Moses claims what you think.
Peter: Once again, I am not saying that Moses was wrong or was wrong in his address to the people in Deut, but in Numbers he is guilty of a sin and so he faced the wrath of God. God wasn't punishing him to punish others just like he didn't get angry with him in Exodus to get angry at someone else. And just to be clear I am not saying that Moses was wrong but simply this that YOU are wrong and yes my interpretation is right.
Peter: I am sorry I can't remember now, but did you give up or are actually seeing the idiocy of your arguments? Let me reiterate: 1) No prophet or human being is perfect. Everybody sins! (Only God (Jesus) is perfect) 2) And since Moses wasn't that perfect (Exodus 4:14) then the rebuke given unto them can easily be directed at THEM rather than the people.
Peter: The flaw is in your logic. If you think, that Moses was a perfect human being that you are even more flawed than I thought. If Moses was "perfect" then yes your reasoning sticks, but without him perfect your reasons and claims are baseless.
And you assert that He was not based on your assertion that it was literal and not allegorical and that He was not a representative of His people which you assert based on your assertion that it is literal.
And assert as you may that my claims are baseless, it does not magically make the basis of my argument not exist.
Peter: I never said that he wasn't the representative of his people. He was! There is no question about that, but he too was a person, a human being with flaws just like you and me. In the instance in question he committed an act which God recognized and hence punished him accordingly. God on many occasions punished his people also, so there is a clear distinction on when God punishes Moses and when God punishes his people. You are trying to make it more complicated than it is.
If He was a representative of His people, and you admit that He was, and if God would be wroth with Him for the sins of His people, and you admit that He was, is it impossible to consider that references to His supposed disobedience are similarly not representative of Him, but representative of His people like *everything else* seemed to be?
Adam is a prophet according to the Quran , not the bible. Since islam regard him as a prophet, he is a prophet, and so whatever the Quran says is true. A weak case. why not the same logic for bible.?
And as for Muslims who ask where they show the word trinity in the Bible, let me ask you the opposite question: how many times does it say that God is ONE in the Bible?
Peter: Paging Peter. I hope you didn't just give up on this discussion Peter. As I mentioned below that I meant that this verse as your evidence is weak (from Deut) for explaining Numbers 20. I have also proven to you why that is (see below). Why then do you deny my interpretation? Or are you re-thinking your position on this?
If you've proven anything, it was certainly not that which you intended.
And the verse from Deuteronomy is entirely relevant because it shows that God could and would become wroth with Moses for the sins of Israel, something which you refuse to acknowledge. You have stated before that it could not and would not happen, and this entirely and completely repudiates that argument.
Peter: You are starting to sound like a broken record and you're trying to make me into one too :) Once again, I not saying that it could never happen or that God could never do this, but in the instance of Numbers 20 it didn't happen and verse 24 is the evidence of it. Why don't you quote it for us and then tell me what is God saying here? Don't you think if it's in the same chapter and time then it has more relevance than the one in Deuteronomy?
But you *did* say that, and I *can* quote you. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if I already have.
But you have not produced evidence that it did not happen there. You cannot prove that it was not another instance where they were held responsible.
And it doesn't matter whether it's in one chapter or another. They were both said by the same person (Moses) about the same concept. Saying it's on a different chapter is as pointless as arguing that it's another instance of the same word.
Peter: Please do quote me as I don't think you are correct.
As for evidence that it was meant for Moses in this instance, I have give you evidence, all you have to do is keep reading till verse 24. And as for proving that whether God was angry with Moses only in another instance, I did give you that instance, you need to go back. (check Exodus 4). So does that satisfy your question?
As for your third point it makes no sense at all. God can mean literally and non-literally if he chooses to.
Peter: I would also like to add to your comment ".... They were both said by the same person (Moses) about the same concept." You are wrong again. Deuteronomy 3:37 Moses is speaking to the people (Moses's words) but in Numbers 20 it's God who speaks to Moses and Aaron (God's words)
Peter: Of course Moses. But you're terribly and purposely missing the point. In one instance Moses is telling people what he believes and in the other instance he is telling what are God's exact words. And what about Exodus 4? You wanted another instance Moses God was only wroth with Moses and I gave you one. So doesn't that prove that it could also happen again or has happened again? I think you somehow want to throw away logic and fit Abdul Baha's interpretation.
Behunchud, the thing you don't seem to realize is that it's all Moses' own words.
And no, you have not proven conclusively that it was not also him being wroth with him for the sake of his people, you have only asserted that. Repeatedly. Repeating an argument over and over does not prove it.
And you have *not* provided proof anywhere that says conclusively "everything said here is literal".
You mean, by *your* standard. I demonstrated it just fine, and you didn't accept it. I can't wake the dead, you'll just have to figure out your standards of prophethood for yourself.
In Christianity a prophet (or seer — 1 Samuel 9:9 ) is one inspired by God through the Holy Spirit to deliver a message for a specific purpose. It is often associated with predicting future events, but in Biblical terms it is wider and can include those given the power to preach repentance to those who do not want to hear the message and to warn of God's wrath for disobedience.
God's calling as a prophet is not considered to elevate an individual for their glory, but for the glory of God and to turn people to him. in the Bible on a number of occasions prophets were called to deliver personal messages (Matthew 14:1-7,2 Kings 3:11. The reception of a message is termed revelation and the delivery of the message is termed prophecy.
Anyone who claims to speak God's words or teach in his name and is not a prophet the Bible terms a false prophet. One test given in the Old Testament in Deuteronomy [6] contains a warning of those who prophecy events which do not come to pass and said they should be put to death. Elsewhere a false prophet may be someone who is purposely trying to deceive, is delusional, under the influence of Satan or is speaking from his own spirit ( Ezekiel 13:3)
Prophets arerecognised to still be human and fallible,they may make wrong decisions, have incorrectpersonal beliefs or opinions,orsin fromtime to time. Theirhearing of revelation does not removeall theirhumanity or perfectthem,nordo theyalways wanttodeliver themessagesthey haveheard (exampleJonah). Nevertheless, Christians believethe minimum requirements ofa true prophetcan be summarized as clear andnot vagueprophecies, 100%accuracyin predicting events and prophets must not contradict the Bible.
Many assume, that all prophecy is foretelling, i.e., predictive in its nature. However, prophecy also concerns the revelation of events which occurred in the past; it may deal with present circumstances (i.e., contemporary with the prophet), or it can look forward to the future. For example, Moses was a prophet (Deuteronomy 18:15), yet when he recorded the creation activity of Genesis 1, he was giving a divinely inspired account of what transpired during the first week of earths history.
The Prophets are those who occupy the supreme station of all of God's creations. They are His confidants, and often His Messengers. God bestows upon them knowledge which they could not know themselves. They represent humanity, and often guide their specific nation or people.
Peter: I agree with most of your standards, however I would like to add that they are "ALWAYS His messengers" not "often". As for KNOWLEDGE I hope you mean what is to come. Totally agree with the last part. However, based on these (your) standards Adam does not fit the profile.
Peter: Well, for starters there were no humans around so there was no reason for the "representation of the spirit of humanity". Secondly, Adam represented the disobedient son of God, so why would he then be the prophet of God? The Bible does not give you a list but you have to read it from the verses and stories I outlined above to understand the "prophets" and their relationship to God. You sound a lot like Muslims when they ask show the word trinity in the Bible.
Really going for the literalist point of view on this one are we?
Alright, so what you're saying is, no it doesn't actually say any of that anywhere, but because you don't think that a Prophet would be this or do this or be like this, Adam isn't a Prophet. Is that about right?
Peter: Didn`t this is how we started out, `the literalist vs. allegorical`` point of view. To my understanding you are the one that are taking this literally when you say `where does it say that Adam is not a prophet in the Bible. All I am saying that based on the roles and lives as quoted in the Bible of other prophets we can derive what a prophet is and what is not. I can give you more references but I am sure you will just pass them away.
Once again, you say disobedient. Now, if what I've proposed is correct, then He is not that. If, on the other hand, what you have been saying is correct, then it wouldn't matter if he was disobedient or not, because Moses would fall under that category and still be a Prophet.
And you still have not produced an answer to my question. There's a lot of assertions and a lot of assumptions, but you have not produced anything *saying* that.
Peter: Adam is not a prophet not only because because of his disobedience but for several other reasons that I outlined earlier. Moses is a prophet of God because God simply chose him to be one in Exodus 3 and 4. In all instances of the prophets in the Bible either God chose them directly or they had a vision from God to be his spokesman. Adam never had any of these. He never spoke to people on God's behalf.
You continue to state that Adam is not a prophet because he does not meet the criteria. When I ask you where you get this criteria, you state a bunch of assumptions, but never post anything definitive on the matter. You assert that things are specifically literal without providing any conclusive proof to this end.
You are basing assertions on assumptions, denying something could be true because it doesn't match your assumptions. Where is your proof?
Peter: I am not asserting anything. Adam is not a prophet based on the criteria (we derive) from the Bible. All you have to do is simply compare him to all the prophets in the Bible and you will see the difference. As for Moses, Numbers 20 is quite clear if you read the entire chapter including verse 24. You for some reason want to ignore verse 24 and use another instance at another point in time for your reference. Sorry Peter, but it's you who are asserting and haven't given any proofs.
You "derive" meaning you assert your interpretation, your conclusion.
The "criteria" isn't a written criteria from the Bible, it's an assumption. It does not say this criteria in the Bible anywhere, you merely conclude that it "must be so".
And no, I'm not ignoring the verse, I am merely disagreeing once again with your interpretation.
Peter: It's funny, how you believe that God was upset with Moses for the sake of Israelites because of the evidence found in the Bible (Deut), even though God never said anywhere in the Bible to Moses that "I am upset with you but it's only because of these Israelites" but you are quick to dismiss the evidence from the Bible that I have presented that Adam is not a prophet. Please be fair.
Peter: You don't have to remind me at all. I wouldn't be having this discussion with you if I hadn't read and understood these passages. Yes, they both were written by Moses but in one instance he is quoting his word or rather his feelings or thoughts, but in the other instance he quotes God's actual words that were spoken to him. But thats not the argument at all. I am not denying that God could be wroth with Moses for the sake of people, just not in this instance (Numbers 20).
Then why do you insist on bashing me over the head with quotes of Him being "mad at Moses" when it is already established that His addresses towards Moses and His anger had been done so as a representative of His people, not for His own sin?
Peter: Because it is simply not true. Moses committed sins just like everyone else. Did he not? So how can you say that in this instance he did not commit a sin and then God punished him for it?
Peter: That is your first problem and the problem of many Muslims and Bahai's who believe in this nonsense that all of their prophets were perfect and sinless. You are right if that is the basis of your belief then "we most certainly are done". As a Christian I know that no one is perfect except God and his son Jesus. The Bible claims it! (not my assertion) So until you can see this fundamental flaw in your reasons you won't get it. I can see now why you believe that God did not punish Moses.
Peter: What are you trying to say in this verse? I hope you are not asserting that here Christ is calling him self "not good"? If you are we can most certainly have a separate discussion about this, as I can prove to you that not only Jesus is "good" and that there is no other better than him but also that in this instance he is also testing and teaching the young wealthy man rather than claiming that he is not "perfect".
Peter: Actually, that's an interesting question I have for you. If Bahai faith is so close to Islam then how come you don't believe that Jesus is perfect as Islam also claims? Muslims only dig out this verse to prove his non-divinity but never do they ever say that was with sin. Do you look at it differently? (Bahai perspective)
Peter: I too have quoted verses: Numbers 20:11, 12, 24. Deuteronomy 3:38. Hebrews 3. Yet you claim that these are assumptions, when you all have is a supposed hypothesis.
Peter: Not at all, that is your assumption as usual. All I am saying (with evidence) that in THIS instance God is speaking to Moses literally and not allegorically.
Peter, Generally speaking, it is not wrong to make assumptions. But, it would be wrong to built a fact on an assumption. you have got to prove that your assumption is correct and then built a fact upon it.
Peter: As for Adam God compared his relationship to Moses (His prophet) to that of Moses and Aaron during their confrontations with Pharaoh. "Then the LORD said to Moses, 'See, I make you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet.'" (Ex 7:1). The Bible does not record Adam speaking on God's behalf anywhere.The arrangement of prophets was needed when there are people separated from God by sin.Adam and Eve were perfect and therefore during their time a prophet was not needed.
Peter: I must also point out that just because God was angry with Moses because of the people of Israel in Deut doesn't necessarily means that was always the case in the entire account of Moses with God. I can quote you Exodus 4:14 where was God was only angry with Moses so by that logic would you now consider that in Numbers 20 God might actually be angry with Moses?
Peter: I am not denying anything. Read my comments above again. Seems to me that it's you whose desperate. I already convinced that Numbers 20 instance was for Moses and Aaron based on the evidence from verse 24. It's you who is denying Bible verses when you deny this verse. Read my question again and try to answer it. I bet you can't.
Peter: I meant that this verse as your evidence is weak for Numbers 20 is weak. You just like going in circles. If you're not denying verse 24 then what would you say is referring to in the same chapter of Numbers 20. Nevermind what Deut is saying, tell me what God says earlier in Numbers 20 and then again in verse 24 to Aaron and then give me your interpretation?
And while I would, if I thought it would help, be quite willing to quote the entire book of numbers, Some Answered Questions, Thief in the Night, and the Quran, unless and until you are willing to come face to face with one fact a barrage of others will do no good.
You still haven't even admitted that my reference from Deut. 3:26 proves that which you denied, that God would become wroth with Moses and Aaron for the sake of Israel's misdeeds, not their own.
Peter: I think you are trying too hard. You are looking for evidence to fit Abdul Baha's interpretation. I am not following anyone's interpretation, I encourage you to read this chapter again from start to finish without any pre-conceived ideas of what this might be pointing to.
You continue to just read the same part over and over again and, instead of providing any real evidence, simply assert that it means what you think it means. This is not supporting your evidence with fact, that's just the fallacy "argumentum ad nauseum" where you're just repeating yourself over and over.
It's a simple thing I've asked. Provide me a place where it *says that it is literal*
All you're saying over and over again is that if you interpret it literally it looks literal, which makes no sense whatsoever.
The instance at a different time illustrates my point that God *did* in fact become "wroth" with them because of what the Israelis did, an instance which shows that not only could it happen, but *did*.
"The instance at a different time illustrates my point that God *did* in fact become "wroth" with them because of what the Israelis did, an instance which shows that not only could it happen, but *did*. "
But that was a different setting and time and circumstances.
You're missing the point. It proves that it *did happen*. The argument that our friend Behunchud was making was that God *wouldn't* do that, that it *didn't* ever happen and in fact *couldn't* happen. This disproves that.
Peter: I never said that it couldn't happen, nor did I asserted that that God wouldn't do that (God is all powerful and can do anything). However, in THIS instance it *didn't* happen. I have already given you my evidence to which proves quite blatantly that it didn't happen. Furthermore, Deut reference is also very weak, as it's Moses who's saying this not God. This could many things, perhaps Moses was getting frustrated and was fed up and was trying to bring people in order.....
... One can't be certain what Moses said is exactly what God felt as well. Again, do not misunderstand, I am not saying that it can't happen as Moses says but I am sure that it didn't happen in Numbers 20 as those are God's words, not Moses.
Jesus is the incarnation of God. jesus is Lord and equal to God. whoever came after him was a liar.
classywoman777 2 years ago
All true prophets (from the bible & Torah) prophesied revealing Gods message, but did Muhammad?
Jesus, the last prophet said, It is Finished! John 19:30
So, would a TRUE prophet of God have time to prophesy if he:
Wages war, raids caravans, kill & mutilate hundreds, own slaves, have 10+ wives, marry a 6 yr old child, kidnap/ransom & worship other gods? No. Not a true prophet of God. Muhammad then, is a prophet of Satan. Satan, hence, helped Muhammad create Islam to deceive the world.
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
jefeisdguard
Jesus never said he was the last proper but he supposed to have said he would ask his father to send some one to speak the truth and he would guide you into whole truth. So Jesus was not the last Prophet. BTW you said he was your God how come he become a prophet. Is God a job? Yeah prophet of Satan came along with the message that Jesus is God, that Satan was Paul. You fucktard read your fucking Bible then you know all your prophets have done worse things than Muhammad.
AdorIslam 2 years ago
Re: Jesus never said he was the last proper [] send someone to speak the truth & he would guide u into whole truth.
The SPIRIT of TRUTH! A.k.a. Holy Spirit! Not Muhammad. Muhammad was flesh & blood NOT a spirit. Know the diff?
Prove Satan = Paul. Why R U swearing? Bible is truth regardless how ugly it may be. Name 1 prophet worse than Muhammad.
How can u regard Muhammad 2B prophet of god when his actions R those of Satan?
Slaves, pedophile, 10+ wives, murder, torture this ur prophet?
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
jefeisdguard
Re: Jesus never said he was the last proper []
Well, when you look at the action of the Prophets in the Bible the actions of Muhammad show that he is the true Prophet and all the other prophets in the Bible are false. Most of the were immoral and ungodly. For an instance Lot he was screwed by his two daughters. Jesus said another comforter, means he considers himself a comforter. Holy spirit never guided anyone into at least one new truth but betrayed Christians whole sale.
voiceofreasoning 2 years ago
You wrote about Lot screwing his 2 daughters
I answered this on your profile page.
I dont know why, but I tried & tried to post but couldnt!
Would be nice if YT would let us know why we cant post, sometimes!
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
jefeisdguard
You wrote about Lot screwing his 2 daughters
I answered this on your profile page.
I dont know why, but I tried & tried to post but couldnt!
Would be nice if YT would let us know why we cant post, sometimes!
I do not block anyone or advice anyone not to post a personal message or even post it on my profile unless someone is a filthy rag. If you can't post it post it to me personally but I do prefer to post it on the thread but sometimes PM is necessary when you can help it.
voiceofreasoning 2 years ago
In fact all most all the Christian world misunderstands the Bible as the word of God because the Bible doesn't say that it is from God but they believe that it is from God. Bible means library of books.
AdorIslam 2 years ago
Islam a pagan religion?
Islam should worship Jesus' Divinity b/c of
Quran 3:47
Muhammed gave up his 1st two gods Al-Rahman & Ar-Rahim to worship Quraysh idols & 3 daughters Al-Alat, Al-Uzzah & Manat.
Quran 4:48 states allah has NO partners! Yet, Quran 4:64 & 65 state Muhammed is!
2nd, Quran states Jesus is judge (Bukhari: V4B55N657 & Bukhari: V4B55N658) as does bible John 5:22 So, what happened to allah? 'ilah' is the arabic word for god & allah is Muhammeds Quraysh gods name.
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
jefeisdguard
slam a pagan religion?
Islam should worship Jesus' Divinity b/c of
Quran 3:47
I don't think with that of the pagan mindset, you can understand anything. Ar-Rahamn and Ar-Raheem are not gods, they are attributes of God there are 99 attributes of God in the Qur'an. Allah is the name of the God in Arabic which Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and all the others worshiped day and night. The other name you mentioned are the 360 idols of your forefathers which Muhammad (S) destroyed.
AdorIslam 2 years ago
Re: Allah is the name of the God in Arabic
WRONG!
'ilah', is the name of god in arabic.
Allah is the name of Muhammeds pagan god
Muhammed settled in on the Quraysh idols & its 3 daughters.
Islam continues pagan traditions of the Quraysh by kissing the Black Stone to circumambulating it 7 times!
Islam has only 1 prophet, Muhammed. Islam claims ALL prophets from bible/torah are theirs too but that is impossible b/c Islam was founded 1,400 yrs ago. Even Muhammads parents were NOT muslim!
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
AdorIslam: The Bible IS inspired word of God. Meaning that Christians recognize it as a written by men, but these men were inspired by God. God did not write the Bible himself, he used his people to carry out his message and record them. Isn't Quran written in the same way? Allah or Gabriel didn't write it, themselves did they? Funny, how it's acceptable for Quran but not acceptable for the Bible?
Behunchud 2 years ago
Behunchud
AdorIslam: The Bible IS inspired word of God. Meaning that Christians recognize it as a written by men,
It is funny that he inspire idiots to write his book but as we know he spoke to Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammad and revealed the message to them. God doesn't inspire men to write what God wants he reveals. People who claim that they are inspired are also telling us they wrote those stories because at that time everybody was writing. Read your Bible carefully before you commit.
AdorIslam 2 years ago
Behunchud
AdorIslam: The Bible IS inspired word of God. Meaning that Christians recognize it as a written by men, but these men were inspired by God. God did not write the Bible himself,
I must say you have a beautiful name. BTW God never wrote any book himself but he is the one who taught man to write an also created everything that exist, including the god that you worship instead worshiping him. Let me as you Behunchud is it so difficult to worship one God who created everything?
AdorIslam 2 years ago
So here you admit that God never wrote any book himself, which is exactly what I was saying. So when you say it's God's Word! you're actually saying God's inspired Word through men!. AdorIslam, you are wrong if you think that Christians do not worship ONE God. But I don't blame you, you have been fed this lie for centuries why would you believe me now. Let me ask you can God do anything? Is God all powerful? If yes, then is it impossible for God to come to earth in human form? Think carefully.
Behunchud 2 years ago
It is obvious that God's oneness differs from man's oneness. Man's oneness makes him limited. Thus it is not possible for one man to be in two places at the same time. But God can be on His throne in heaven and, at the same time, be here on this earth. This is neither impossible nor difficult for God. And we do not mean that part of Him is in heaven while the other part is on the earth. We mean that God, in all His glory, can be on His throne in heaven and at the same time be here on this earth.
Behunchud 2 years ago
This is exactly what happened when Christ came to this earth. The Bible states clearly that in Christ "dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily". This is what we call the Incarnation.We have heard of great men and kings who wore poor people's clothes and went to visit the poor in their homes without taking servants with them in order not to frighten the poor and in order to see their needs and to help them. We admire such great men, and praise them for their humility and nobility.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Before Christ ascended to heaven, He commanded His disciples saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:18,19). Notice that He did not say to them, "in the names of the Father and the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." He said, "in the name" because it is one name—the glorious name of the one and only true and living God.
Behunchud 2 years ago
But you Adorislam might object and say, "How can that be? How can three be one?" This objection rises from the great error in trying to apply the rules of physics and mathematics to the Godhead. Herein lies the mistake and the cause of the perplexity. The Almighty God, who created nature and imposed on it rules of mathematics and other natural laws, is Himself not under such laws. We cannot, and should not, apply the laws of created material to spiritual issues.
Behunchud 2 years ago
AdorIslam: If your intention is to offend me somehow, you failed. God didn't inspire "idiots" to write his book, he did however inspire people from all walks of life to give his message. Meaning, they could be rich, poor, non-believers, etc. This does not discourage me in my faith, rather it encourages me. Knowing that God can choose anyone! (even me) to do his work. Yes "....God reveals" but how? THROUGH MEN & WOMEN!.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Behunchud
AdorIslam: If your intention is to offend me somehow, you failed. God didn't inspire "idiots" to write his book,
God can choose anyone to do his work, true but he chooses whom he will. That is where the problem came The Jews were really for the message but the Arabs at that time were not for the message but for the man. His own uncles and relatives were against him because why Muhammad why not me, this was the pagan question? God revealed his messages through his messages.
AdorIslam 2 years ago
Jesus, the last prophet said while on the cross, It is finished!
John 19:30. All prophesies fulfilled.
How can anyone think a pedophile, murdering pirate whose only obsession is booty could be an encore to Jesus?
Muhammed is NOT the comforter
John 14:26 But the Comforter, WHICH IS THE HOLY GHOST, whom the Father will
send in my name
Muhammd the antichrist:
John 5:43 I am come in my Fathers name, & ye receive me NOT: if another shall come in his OWN name, him ye will receive
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
jefeisdguard
Jesus, the last prophet said while on the cross, It is finished!
John 19:30. All prophesies fulfilled.
The person on the cross said that " Oh my God, Oh my God why have you forsaken me" So the game is over here because here it is not Jesus. And before his supposed ascension, he would request his father (God) to sent someone who will teach the his followers al the truth which he did not teach. If he is true it is Muhammad not any stupid Holy Spirit which betraying the Christians.
AdorIslam 2 years ago
Re: Oh my God, Oh my God why have you forsaken me
You dont understand Matthew 27:46
Read Matthew 26:28, then John 16:32 then
2 Corinthians 5:21 & James 1:13
Jesus took upon Himself all the sins of the world. Even tho His Father was with Him, He left Jesus b/c of the sins . God the Father will NOT allow sin in His presence. Jesus felt His father leaving Him & cried out,
You keep saying allah! WHICH ALLAH? CHOOSE! Which pagan diety is your Islamic allah?
We are already debating by PM
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
jefeisdguard
Re: Oh my God, Oh my God why have you forsaken me
I understand Matthiew alright, what I don't understand is why there are no gospel of all the disciples of Jesus and why there is no Gospel of Jesus?
AdorIslam 2 years ago
AdorIslam: If you admit that God can choose whom he wills, then you shouldn't have any problem with accepting the Bible and the writers of the the Bible. Especially, when Islam orginated 600 years after the Bible and Torah and no one for those 600 years or so had any issues with either of the two or it's writers.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Behunchud
AdorIslam: If you admit that God can choose
Yes he chooses whom he will that doesn't mean he will choose anybody. Of course Islam came some 600 years later because God chose the seed of Ishmael 600 years later, same way Jesus was chosen some thousands of years later does that make Jesus a false prophet? You are wrong Bible was not with the people. It carried death penalty to possess a copy of the Bible. Bible is with the people only a few centuries ago. So in between who played...
AdorIslam 2 years ago
AdorIslam: "...that doesn't mean he will choose anybody..." Now you claim to know what God can and cannot (or will not) do? God DID not choose the seed of Ishmael. Where did you get that? I don't know what you are talking about that "...carried death penalty..." care to explain?
Behunchud 2 years ago
And to add to that "God reveled his messages through his messages".... And his messages were brought to us by PEOPLE.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Behunchud
I disagree that God can choose anyone to do his work. Correct position here is that God can forgive anyone provided he is not an idol worshiper or Jesus worshiper. At the same time you say Muhammad is not the Prophet. The problem is when you are misguided you speak crap. Here you put your trust in somebody else who says Jesus is God where Jesus never said anything but others say these things. You are talking about Injeele markus, Lucus but I want Injeele Esa. Don't be a machooth
AdorIslam 2 years ago
AdorIslam: "I disagree that God can choose anyone to do his work..." Are you certain of that? According to YOUR Islam, Muhammad was a pagan worshiper as a child but then became a prophet of God (according to you not me). Secondly, I don't put trust in what "others" have said about Jesus, Jesus did say in many occasions that he is God or God like, so who am I to argue with him? Sorry, but there is no evidence anywhere that there was an "injeel Isa", unless you can prove otherwise!
Behunchud 2 years ago
Re: In fact all most all the Christian world misunderstands the Bible
No, the only FACT here is that U do not understand the bible.
Bible IN FACT, says it is from God!
[2 Peter 1:20,21 & 2 Timothy 3:16]
Al-Rahman & Ar-Rahim may be attributes but they are also REAL gods Muhammed once worshipped. Allah was NEVER in the bible, hence it is impossible for Abraham, Moses or Jesus to be muslim or worship allah. Islam, the pagan religion, was created 1,400 yrs ago by Muhammed, its one & ONLY prophet!
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
jefeisdguard
Re: In fact all most all the Christian world misunderstands the Bible
True, because it is not the book that God revealed to any of the prophet but yet you find some verses supposed to be from God and his messengers found in there. I want you to clearly quote the verses so that others can read. You have just posted some references that doesn't make any references. Can you post a single verse where Jesus says that he is God and everyone should worship him?
AdorIslam 2 years ago
Re: Can you post a single verse where Jesus says that he is God and everyone should worship him?
Interesting line of questions! What is the name of your playbook? Is it titled, "How to talk & debate non-muslims"?
I have received this very same question from EVERY SINGLE MUSLIM I HAVE DEBATED.
& I've been debating muslims over 2 yrs.
Whats the name of ur playbook? B/c it is stupid. It shows muslims do NOT understand the bible whatsoever.
Jesus was almost stoned 2 death 4 implying He is God.
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
jefeisdguard
You don't produce questions in factories, these are legitimate questions which Christians have not produced answers. Well, Qur'an is clear in saying Jesus is one of the servants of God and God is the God of all the gods and also Qur'an says that it is the mother of all the books. Allah is the Lord of the worlds and Muhammad is mercy to the worlds. Show me Jesus said something like it. In fact Youtube is not the place to debate with 500 character. Why not debate personally.
AdorIslam 2 years ago
AdorIslam: "...Christians have not produced answers". Please refer to one of my videos watch?v=FRK48eYOC5M for the response to this very question. You can feel free to debate me anytime. I have created a free forum called islam vs christianity . freeforums . org. You may post your arguments there. I have added a few categories, but if you have other please let me know and I will add them.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Behunchud
AdorIslam: "...Christians have not produced answers". Please refer to one of my videos watch?v=FRK48eYOC5M for the response to this very question.
You have not understood what I said. You have not produced a single answer to what we have been saying but you keep saying the same thing over and over again. Let me make it simple, Produce a saying of Jesus where he says I am God and worship me, produce a gospel that Jesus left behind. What you do is you quote someone else.
AdorIslam 2 years ago
We are not interested in what Luke said or mark said or some of the so called prophecies that you want to boast. When he was on the cross he accused God of betrayal which means he did not know he was to be sacrificed by his God for your sin. Where is your proof or evidence that he really died for your sins. In fact that was the Gospel of Paul not the Gospel of Jesusl: (Timothy II 2:8): Remember the Jesus Christ of seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel."
AdorIslam 2 years ago
AdorIslam: What you should be really saying is that "We are not interested to see or hear the truth". The "So called prophecies" that you easily discard were all fulfilled by Christ yet you still want prove? As for him accusing God of betrayal, where did you get that from? If you are referring to his last words, please check Psalm 22 in the Old Testament, Jesus was quoting it on the cross and then ask yourself the question.
Behunchud 2 years ago
AdorIslam: If you had bothered to view my video you would have got your answer. The point is that it does not matter whether Christ said those words literally "I am God and worship me", but rather he made many indirect comments which are just as clear. Tell me if a man comes to you and says that I am God, would you believe him? Why then would you want to hear it from Jesus when you are not going to believe it anyways?
Behunchud 2 years ago
Good video.
irishxxkelt 2 years ago
Again, thank you.
jefeisdguard 2 years ago
Excellent work, here...indeed, every part of John 8 is consistently misquoted by all who reject the message of Jesus. John 8:58 is such a blatant admission of divinity by Jesus that all non-believers in the Son of God become convicted when confronted by this one sentence...
Jesus, God the Son, emphatically stated that before Abraham was, "I AM," equating Himself with God in power, majesty and honesty. There is nowhere to hide from this, and one must believe in Him or not believe. God bless.
stronzo5785 2 years ago
Peter: You claim that you had read the Bible. Well, then how you aren't aware of the exact same situation as Numbers 20 that occurred in Exodus 17? What did Moses do in this instance?
Behunchud 2 years ago
Peter: You never really answered my question, "if I believe it for a second that God was wroth with Moses for the sake of his people and so he punished him instead of his people, then how do you explain Exodus 4? By your reasoning since God was wroth with Moses here alone, doesn't that mean that he CAN and has been wroth with Moses in other instances?
Behunchud 2 years ago
Actually you are incorrect I did answer that question.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: No you didn't. Your reasoning is that since in one of the instances Moses claimed that God was wroth with him for the sake of others so in any other instances (before or after) it is understood that it would ALWAYS be this case. But I already showed you that God in Exodus 4 was ONLY wroth with Moses so by YOUR theory now we (really you) should consider that is is possible that God CAN be wroth with Moses for his sin(s).
Behunchud 2 years ago
You have not demonstrated that, you have asserted that interpretation.
And God can do anything Behunchud. But it doesn't change what He *did* do, and what *did* happen.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: It's not an assertion. I know God can do anything which is why I stand by what I said that Moses was not immune to God's wrath. God CAN and HAS reprimanded Moses for HIS sins. The evidence is quite clear, you on the other hand want to believe in something totally untrue just because it fits YOUR assumption that Moses never sinned and was perfect.
Behunchud 2 years ago
You are saying that "this *IS* what I think it is. It is not something else and cannot be something else, and anything other than that is absolutely wrong"
Please explain to me how that is not an assertion.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Another interesting thing that I found in your so called "evidence" is if you keep reading the passage of Deuteronomy 3 you will notice how your interpretations are incorrect. Yes the verse 26 does say " But because of you the LORD was angry with me and would not listen to me...." but if you finish this passage you will also see verse 28 where God says ..."But commission Joshua, ... for he will lead this people across and will cause them to inherit the land that you will see."
Behunchud 2 years ago
So my question is this: If what you say is true and God wanted to punish or teach the people a lesson and that is why he punished Moses in Numbers 20 then why would still let the people see the promised land but NOT Moses? In fact God wants Joshua to lead them there. Why God our father give his children mixed messages?
Behunchud 2 years ago
This is but an example of the mercy of God. It was not punishment for punishment's sake, but a lesson for the sake of teaching people for thousands of years.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Now you are just bordering on absurdity. Think God as a parent and we all as his children, if your parent wanted to teach you a lesson why would he let you into the promised land and punish someone totally who is not guilty? By commissioning Joshua and denying Moses God is giving a totally different message than what you believe.
Behunchud 2 years ago
You know, all this great second-guessing what God would do and why really has nothing to do with the fact that the evidence is there and the scripture shows certain things. You're at the point where you're hypothetically attempting to point out God's supposed motivations from your point of view.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: C'mon lets be real as to who is really hypothesizing. I am reading this instance like this (as it is written in the Bible):
1) People grumbled and fell in disbelief
2) God commanded Moses to act in a certain way
3) Moses acted in a sightly different way but moreover making it sound like as if it was him who showed this mercy and not God.
4) God punished Moses according to his sin.
This is in the scripture and not my assertions so how can you say that I am second-guessing.
Behunchud 2 years ago
You are asserting an absolutely literal interpretation.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Literal yes but not an absolute interpretation. God did want to teach his people and the future generations to come that even though Moses was one of the most beloved and faithful servant of God even then he is not immune from God's punishment if he disbeliefs or let pride rule him.
Behunchud 2 years ago
So you say "not absolute", does that mean that you are open to the possibility that your interpretation is wrong and that it is not literal, or that it is not absolutely literal only partially so, or some third option?
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: you misunderstand me for the umpteenth time. I already explained to you why that is but since it escaped you completely I will try again. God in his infinite wisdom and mercy punish Moses for the sins HE committed, which was also a lesson for the rest of the people. The lesson is quite simple, 1) Trust in God 2) Do not make yourself equal to God. Moses is guilty on both accounts.
Behunchud 2 years ago
when i read the book of Genesis , it didn't cross my mind that Adam was a prophet. how is that he is prophet.? what is his prophesy.? if Adam is a prophet, then i bet Virgin Mary the mother of God is a prophet as well.
annakarenina100 3 years ago
If you read Isaiah as literally, it wouldn't cross your mind that Emanuel wouldn't be named Emanuel.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
It's quite simple really. In Numbers 20 God says "12 But the LORD said to Moses and Aaron, "Because you did not trust in me enough to honor me as holy in the sight of the Israelites, you will not bring this community into the land I give them."" and then again in verse 24 he reiterates " "Aaron will be gathered to his people. He will not enter the land I give the Israelites, because both of you rebelled against my command at thewaters of Meribah." how can you get that this wasmeant from others?
Behunchud 3 years ago
Ah, but if he can be wroth with them for the sins of others, why would it not be so in his address?
You yourself have argued that Prophets are often representatives of their people. Would it not be the case here as well?
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: I am not denying that God can be wroth with Moses and Aaron for the sins of Israelites. I am sure it's possible, but in THIS instance it wasn't so. I am not making assumptions based on speculations but on the evidence found in the Bible and in verse 12 combined with verse 24. Now answer me this, was Moses so perfect that God can never be upset/wroth/angry with him only? Question number wasn't God only angry with Moses in Exodus 4? So why can't it be true in this instance?
Behunchud 3 years ago
If Moses and Aaron were representatives of their people, then the rebuke given unto them would be similarly directed at the people.
And yes, Moses was that perfect.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: Now whose making assumptions and assertions without any evidence? Your reasoning makes no sense Peter. So what you are saying just because Moses and Aaron were representatives of their people, God would always rebuke them in order to teach them a lesson? As for your second point that is one of the differences between Islam/Bahai and Christianity, as holy as close to God Moses we do not consider him to be perfect. Bible tells us that no one is perfect except for one Jesus.
Behunchud 3 years ago
It's not an assertion, it's an answer. And I have given evidence, which you have repeatedly ignored.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: You haven't given my any evidence. All you have said is that based on what Moses said to his people in ANOTHER instance. The incident mentioned in Numbers 20 occurs before the incident in Deuteronomy. It's not an assertion but a Bible fact.
Behunchud 2 years ago
The fact that it was another instance is irrelevant. It sets a precedent, that God would and had done something, that Moses did and had acted in that manner in the past, establishing that it was, in fact, possible in such a situation. You have provided no evidence that this was not such a situation save that it was "another instance".
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: The fact that it was another instance is not irrelevant. Perhaps for you who so desperately are trying to convince me that Moses was sinless. If you are correct then when God was wroth Moses and Moses alone in Exodus 4 then that would too set a precedent. Explain that!
Behunchud 2 years ago
Howso? Where does it say "I am wroth with you specifically not as any form of representation of the sins of your people and what I am saying right here is not that either"
Seriously, we've established that when He has been wroth with Moses it has been as a representation of His people. What you haven't established is any proof that all other instances haven't followed that same pattern in symbolic language.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: The same can be flipped around at you and said that "where does GOD says that God is wroth with Moses for the sake of his people"? You have only established that Moses said that God was wroth with him for the sake of his people. Seriously, Peter it's not symbolic at all! God was wroth with Moses for HIS sin not for the sin of the people. And YES Moses did sin when he put himself in equal with God. Which is why he was denied entrance but people under Joshua's command were not.
Behunchud 2 years ago
When Moses gathered the people for this miracle, he just snapped. Proud self-confidence and self-sufficiency. His pride demeaned and belittled others; he called them rebels. His pride glorified himself by usurping Gods role in giving them the water; must we (me and Aaron) fetch water out of the rock. His pride made him think he knew better than God; by using his own method to extract the water rather than Gods. His pride made him lose his temper; by violently lashing out at the rock.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Do you see how even the greatest believers can also be great unbelievers. How often God must say to you as he said to Moses: You believed me not. And, if you have knowledge of your own heart you will cry, I believe, help thou mine unbelief. Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin (Heb.3:12-13).
Behunchud 2 years ago
In Gods patient grace, the people got the water, but Moses lost the Promised Land. Though he was old, experienced, tested, tried,
faithful, yet here, near the end of his life, he fell. One act, one mistake, and all he was living for was taken away from him. Here
was a noble life blighted by one significant failure at the point of his greatest strength.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Moses was adept at teaching, yes.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Yes he was adept but at the same time he too was sinful just like the rest of us. He too was imperfect and if you read the Bible you will see that.
Behunchud 2 years ago
You know, for all my reading of the Bible, I still fail to only see your interpretation.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Really! If you still claim that Moses was perfect than how do you explain Exodus 4:14 (Why is God angry here?)?, or Exodus 2:11 & 14? (Is Moses proud and happy about his actions?), or Numbers 20:10-12, then 24 (These ones also show Moses very human nature). Perhaps you should read it again and this time more closely.
Behunchud 2 years ago
I have done as you asked and gone back, again, and reread all of those, again. I have carefully gone over each sentence and then some.
As I am neither the Master nor the Guardian, I am not qualified to interpret authoritatively the scriptures of God, and as I am unaware of specific explanations of those exact verses I cannot interpret them for you. But, I can and shall comment on them.
Why is it that you restrict yourself to one absolute interpretation of those verses?
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: So if you as seeing how you put it that you are "unaware of specific explanations of those exact verses..." couldn't it be possible that my explanation could very well be valid? The reason why I believe it (my interpretation) to be true is because, the evidence supports it, both interpretations can't be true (meaning Moses can't be a sinner and a "not sinner") at the same time.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Peter: You cannot explain these verses which I quoted to you, and hide behind your Master and Guardian, yet you are quick to reject my explanations when I have and can clearly interpret them for you. Do you think that's fair? That's like saying "your answer is incorrect!, but I don't know the answer either, I just know that you are wrong". It doesn't take a scholar to interpret these verses or the Bible for that matter all you need is an open mind.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Peter: We can take each verse separately and one at a time if you so wish. Why do you think in Exodus 4 God gets angry with Moses? And more importantly is he really angry with Moses?
Behunchud 2 years ago
You can assert that all you like. It remains your interpretation.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
On another note, if the rebuke was directed towards the people and not to Moses and Aaron then why does God says "Because YOU did not trust in me enough to honor me as holy..." and "AARON will be gathered to his people. HE will not enter the land I give the ISRAELITES, because BOTH OF YOU rebelled against my command..." (Caps are mine) In both verses God is quite clear as to who he is referring to.
Behunchud 3 years ago
If Moses is a representative of his people then naturally he would be the one addressed.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Furthermore, if Moses was so perfect why was God angry with him in Exodus 4:14 "Then the LORD's anger burned against Moses...."?
Behunchud 3 years ago
Once again, if Moses was a representative of His people then it makes sense that He would be addressed.
Like it said before "the Lord was WROTH WITH ME for your sakes".
So repeating that it says He was mad at Moses **does not matter**, because it has already been established that He would be mad at Moses **for their sakes**
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Sure I am not denying that Moses was representing his people. But, God in any instance tells Moses that he is wroth with him for the wrong doings of the people. Or does he? Can you provide me this evidence from the Bible? When you say well he said "the Lord was wroth with me..." what you are actually saying is that Moses said that to his people, based on his interpretations of God's message. I am fine with Moses claiming this, but in Numbers 20 neither God or Moses claims what you think.
Behunchud 2 years ago
If you are going to say "Moses was wrong my interpretation is right" then you are entirely free to assert that.
But I have nothing more to argue with you at that point.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Once again, I am not saying that Moses was wrong or was wrong in his address to the people in Deut, but in Numbers he is guilty of a sin and so he faced the wrath of God. God wasn't punishing him to punish others just like he didn't get angry with him in Exodus to get angry at someone else. And just to be clear I am not saying that Moses was wrong but simply this that YOU are wrong and yes my interpretation is right.
Behunchud 2 years ago
You are free to assert that your interpretation is right.
But if that's all that you have to base it off of, I think we're done.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: I am sorry I can't remember now, but did you give up or are actually seeing the idiocy of your arguments? Let me reiterate: 1) No prophet or human being is perfect. Everybody sins! (Only God (Jesus) is perfect) 2) And since Moses wasn't that perfect (Exodus 4:14) then the rebuke given unto them can easily be directed at THEM rather than the people.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Are you familiar with the term "argumentum ad nauseum"?
You are simply repeating yourself over and over again. Bashing me over the head with something doesn't change the flaws in its logic.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: The flaw is in your logic. If you think, that Moses was a perfect human being that you are even more flawed than I thought. If Moses was "perfect" then yes your reasoning sticks, but without him perfect your reasons and claims are baseless.
Behunchud 2 years ago
And you assert that He was not based on your assertion that it was literal and not allegorical and that He was not a representative of His people which you assert based on your assertion that it is literal.
And assert as you may that my claims are baseless, it does not magically make the basis of my argument not exist.
Anything else?
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: I never said that he wasn't the representative of his people. He was! There is no question about that, but he too was a person, a human being with flaws just like you and me. In the instance in question he committed an act which God recognized and hence punished him accordingly. God on many occasions punished his people also, so there is a clear distinction on when God punishes Moses and when God punishes his people. You are trying to make it more complicated than it is.
Behunchud 2 years ago
If He was a representative of His people, and you admit that He was, and if God would be wroth with Him for the sins of His people, and you admit that He was, is it impossible to consider that references to His supposed disobedience are similarly not representative of Him, but representative of His people like *everything else* seemed to be?
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Adam is a prophet according to the Quran , not the bible. Since islam regard him as a prophet, he is a prophet, and so whatever the Quran says is true. A weak case. why not the same logic for bible.?
annakarenina100 3 years ago
And as for Muslims who ask where they show the word trinity in the Bible, let me ask you the opposite question: how many times does it say that God is ONE in the Bible?
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: Paging Peter. I hope you didn't just give up on this discussion Peter. As I mentioned below that I meant that this verse as your evidence is weak (from Deut) for explaining Numbers 20. I have also proven to you why that is (see below). Why then do you deny my interpretation? Or are you re-thinking your position on this?
Behunchud 3 years ago
If you've proven anything, it was certainly not that which you intended.
And the verse from Deuteronomy is entirely relevant because it shows that God could and would become wroth with Moses for the sins of Israel, something which you refuse to acknowledge. You have stated before that it could not and would not happen, and this entirely and completely repudiates that argument.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: You are starting to sound like a broken record and you're trying to make me into one too :) Once again, I not saying that it could never happen or that God could never do this, but in the instance of Numbers 20 it didn't happen and verse 24 is the evidence of it. Why don't you quote it for us and then tell me what is God saying here? Don't you think if it's in the same chapter and time then it has more relevance than the one in Deuteronomy?
Behunchud 3 years ago
But you *did* say that, and I *can* quote you. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if I already have.
But you have not produced evidence that it did not happen there. You cannot prove that it was not another instance where they were held responsible.
And it doesn't matter whether it's in one chapter or another. They were both said by the same person (Moses) about the same concept. Saying it's on a different chapter is as pointless as arguing that it's another instance of the same word.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: Please do quote me as I don't think you are correct.
As for evidence that it was meant for Moses in this instance, I have give you evidence, all you have to do is keep reading till verse 24. And as for proving that whether God was angry with Moses only in another instance, I did give you that instance, you need to go back. (check Exodus 4). So does that satisfy your question?
As for your third point it makes no sense at all. God can mean literally and non-literally if he chooses to.
Behunchud 3 years ago
Peter: I would also like to add to your comment ".... They were both said by the same person (Moses) about the same concept." You are wrong again. Deuteronomy 3:37 Moses is speaking to the people (Moses's words) but in Numbers 20 it's God who speaks to Moses and Aaron (God's words)
Behunchud 3 years ago
And who wrote Numbers?
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: Of course Moses. But you're terribly and purposely missing the point. In one instance Moses is telling people what he believes and in the other instance he is telling what are God's exact words. And what about Exodus 4? You wanted another instance Moses God was only wroth with Moses and I gave you one. So doesn't that prove that it could also happen again or has happened again? I think you somehow want to throw away logic and fit Abdul Baha's interpretation.
Behunchud 3 years ago
Behunchud, the thing you don't seem to realize is that it's all Moses' own words.
And no, you have not proven conclusively that it was not also him being wroth with him for the sake of his people, you have only asserted that. Repeatedly. Repeating an argument over and over does not prove it.
And you have *not* provided proof anywhere that says conclusively "everything said here is literal".
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: And as for proving, you still haven't proven that Adam is a prophet of God by any standards which is what my original intention (point) was.
Behunchud 3 years ago
You mean, by *your* standard. I demonstrated it just fine, and you didn't accept it. I can't wake the dead, you'll just have to figure out your standards of prophethood for yourself.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: wrong Peter, it's the standard that people have followed for centuries, it's not mine. Bible tells us the requirements for being a prophet.
Behunchud 3 years ago
Oh do show me where these requirements are outlined in the Bible, I would like to see them.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
In Christianity a prophet (or seer — 1 Samuel 9:9 ) is one inspired by God through the Holy Spirit to deliver a message for a specific purpose. It is often associated with predicting future events, but in Biblical terms it is wider and can include those given the power to preach repentance to those who do not want to hear the message and to warn of God's wrath for disobedience.
Behunchud 3 years ago
God's calling as a prophet is not considered to elevate an individual for their glory, but for the glory of God and to turn people to him. in the Bible on a number of occasions prophets were called to deliver personal messages (Matthew 14:1-7,2 Kings 3:11. The reception of a message is termed revelation and the delivery of the message is termed prophecy.
Behunchud 3 years ago
Anyone who claims to speak God's words or teach in his name and is not a prophet the Bible terms a false prophet. One test given in the Old Testament in Deuteronomy [6] contains a warning of those who prophecy events which do not come to pass and said they should be put to death. Elsewhere a false prophet may be someone who is purposely trying to deceive, is delusional, under the influence of Satan or is speaking from his own spirit ( Ezekiel 13:3)
Behunchud 3 years ago
Prophets arerecognised to still be human and fallible,they may make wrong decisions, have incorrectpersonal beliefs or opinions,orsin fromtime to time. Theirhearing of revelation does not removeall theirhumanity or perfectthem,nordo theyalways wanttodeliver themessagesthey haveheard (exampleJonah). Nevertheless, Christians believethe minimum requirements ofa true prophetcan be summarized as clear andnot vagueprophecies, 100%accuracyin predicting events and prophets must not contradict the Bible.
Behunchud 3 years ago
Many assume, that all prophecy is foretelling, i.e., predictive in its nature. However, prophecy also concerns the revelation of events which occurred in the past; it may deal with present circumstances (i.e., contemporary with the prophet), or it can look forward to the future. For example, Moses was a prophet (Deuteronomy 18:15), yet when he recorded the creation activity of Genesis 1, he was giving a divinely inspired account of what transpired during the first week of earths history.
Behunchud 3 years ago
Peter: You tell us what are your standards for prophet hood.
Behunchud 3 years ago
The Prophets are those who occupy the supreme station of all of God's creations. They are His confidants, and often His Messengers. God bestows upon them knowledge which they could not know themselves. They represent humanity, and often guide their specific nation or people.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: I agree with most of your standards, however I would like to add that they are "ALWAYS His messengers" not "often". As for KNOWLEDGE I hope you mean what is to come. Totally agree with the last part. However, based on these (your) standards Adam does not fit the profile.
Behunchud 3 years ago
I disagree. I think Adam is a fundamental representation of the spirit of humanity. Prove me wrong.
Now Behunchud, could you please point out the verse in the Bible where it states the prerequisites to Prophethood?
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: Well, for starters there were no humans around so there was no reason for the "representation of the spirit of humanity". Secondly, Adam represented the disobedient son of God, so why would he then be the prophet of God? The Bible does not give you a list but you have to read it from the verses and stories I outlined above to understand the "prophets" and their relationship to God. You sound a lot like Muslims when they ask show the word trinity in the Bible.
Behunchud 3 years ago
Really going for the literalist point of view on this one are we?
Alright, so what you're saying is, no it doesn't actually say any of that anywhere, but because you don't think that a Prophet would be this or do this or be like this, Adam isn't a Prophet. Is that about right?
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: Didn`t this is how we started out, `the literalist vs. allegorical`` point of view. To my understanding you are the one that are taking this literally when you say `where does it say that Adam is not a prophet in the Bible. All I am saying that based on the roles and lives as quoted in the Bible of other prophets we can derive what a prophet is and what is not. I can give you more references but I am sure you will just pass them away.
Behunchud 3 years ago
Once again, you say disobedient. Now, if what I've proposed is correct, then He is not that. If, on the other hand, what you have been saying is correct, then it wouldn't matter if he was disobedient or not, because Moses would fall under that category and still be a Prophet.
And you still have not produced an answer to my question. There's a lot of assertions and a lot of assumptions, but you have not produced anything *saying* that.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: Adam is not a prophet not only because because of his disobedience but for several other reasons that I outlined earlier. Moses is a prophet of God because God simply chose him to be one in Exodus 3 and 4. In all instances of the prophets in the Bible either God chose them directly or they had a vision from God to be his spokesman. Adam never had any of these. He never spoke to people on God's behalf.
Behunchud 3 years ago
You continue to state that Adam is not a prophet because he does not meet the criteria. When I ask you where you get this criteria, you state a bunch of assumptions, but never post anything definitive on the matter. You assert that things are specifically literal without providing any conclusive proof to this end.
You are basing assertions on assumptions, denying something could be true because it doesn't match your assumptions. Where is your proof?
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: I am not asserting anything. Adam is not a prophet based on the criteria (we derive) from the Bible. All you have to do is simply compare him to all the prophets in the Bible and you will see the difference. As for Moses, Numbers 20 is quite clear if you read the entire chapter including verse 24. You for some reason want to ignore verse 24 and use another instance at another point in time for your reference. Sorry Peter, but it's you who are asserting and haven't given any proofs.
Behunchud 3 years ago
You "derive" meaning you assert your interpretation, your conclusion.
The "criteria" isn't a written criteria from the Bible, it's an assumption. It does not say this criteria in the Bible anywhere, you merely conclude that it "must be so".
And no, I'm not ignoring the verse, I am merely disagreeing once again with your interpretation.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: It's funny, how you believe that God was upset with Moses for the sake of Israelites because of the evidence found in the Bible (Deut), even though God never said anywhere in the Bible to Moses that "I am upset with you but it's only because of these Israelites" but you are quick to dismiss the evidence from the Bible that I have presented that Adam is not a prophet. Please be fair.
Behunchud 3 years ago
well, Muslims consider hima prophet. so, whatever islam says or the Quran says is true. why.? becasue it is the Quran and it is true.!
annakarenina100 3 years ago
If you're going to continue to argue the difference between Moses and God I am going to have to continue reminding you that Moses wrote both books.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: You don't have to remind me at all. I wouldn't be having this discussion with you if I hadn't read and understood these passages. Yes, they both were written by Moses but in one instance he is quoting his word or rather his feelings or thoughts, but in the other instance he quotes God's actual words that were spoken to him. But thats not the argument at all. I am not denying that God could be wroth with Moses for the sake of people, just not in this instance (Numbers 20).
Behunchud 3 years ago
Then why do you insist on bashing me over the head with quotes of Him being "mad at Moses" when it is already established that His addresses towards Moses and His anger had been done so as a representative of His people, not for His own sin?
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Because it is simply not true. Moses committed sins just like everyone else. Did he not? So how can you say that in this instance he did not commit a sin and then God punished him for it?
Behunchud 2 years ago
You ask it as though it were rhetorical, but I shall answer anyway.
No, He did not.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: That is your first problem and the problem of many Muslims and Bahai's who believe in this nonsense that all of their prophets were perfect and sinless. You are right if that is the basis of your belief then "we most certainly are done". As a Christian I know that no one is perfect except God and his son Jesus. The Bible claims it! (not my assertion) So until you can see this fundamental flaw in your reasons you won't get it. I can see now why you believe that God did not punish Moses.
Behunchud 2 years ago
"why do you call Me good? There is none good save God"
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: What are you trying to say in this verse? I hope you are not asserting that here Christ is calling him self "not good"? If you are we can most certainly have a separate discussion about this, as I can prove to you that not only Jesus is "good" and that there is no other better than him but also that in this instance he is also testing and teaching the young wealthy man rather than claiming that he is not "perfect".
Behunchud 2 years ago
Peter: Actually, that's an interesting question I have for you. If Bahai faith is so close to Islam then how come you don't believe that Jesus is perfect as Islam also claims? Muslims only dig out this verse to prove his non-divinity but never do they ever say that was with sin. Do you look at it differently? (Bahai perspective)
Behunchud 2 years ago
Before I answer, are you genuinely interested in Baha'i theology or are you just asking for the sake of the argument?
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: I am only asking because it seems that you differ on the view that Jesus is perfect (based on both the Islamic and Christian perspective).
Behunchud 2 years ago
All I did was quote the verse, and you post paragraph after paragraph of assumption, accusation, and interpretation. Think about it.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: I too have quoted verses: Numbers 20:11, 12, 24. Deuteronomy 3:38. Hebrews 3. Yet you claim that these are assumptions, when you all have is a supposed hypothesis.
Behunchud 2 years ago
I claim your interpretations and your assertions of literalism are assumptions, not the verses.
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: How convenient! I give you the verses and you tell me that is not what they say, but rather what YOU think.
Behunchud 2 years ago
Are you trying to tell me that you feel that everything in the Bible is literal?
PeterJDeer 2 years ago
Peter: Not at all, that is your assumption as usual. All I am saying (with evidence) that in THIS instance God is speaking to Moses literally and not allegorically.
Behunchud 2 years ago
As for Moses in Numbers 20 and specifically verse 24 proves that God was punishing him directly.
Behunchud 3 years ago
You continue to assert that without providing evidence to that conclusion.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter, Generally speaking, it is not wrong to make assumptions. But, it would be wrong to built a fact on an assumption. you have got to prove that your assumption is correct and then built a fact upon it.
annakarenina100 3 years ago
Peter: As for Adam God compared his relationship to Moses (His prophet) to that of Moses and Aaron during their confrontations with Pharaoh. "Then the LORD said to Moses, 'See, I make you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet.'" (Ex 7:1). The Bible does not record Adam speaking on God's behalf anywhere.The arrangement of prophets was needed when there are people separated from God by sin.Adam and Eve were perfect and therefore during their time a prophet was not needed.
Behunchud 3 years ago
And I do not deny the verse, I deny your literalist interpretation. You are actually saying that what Moses has said is "weak".
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: I must also point out that just because God was angry with Moses because of the people of Israel in Deut doesn't necessarily means that was always the case in the entire account of Moses with God. I can quote you Exodus 4:14 where was God was only angry with Moses so by that logic would you now consider that in Numbers 20 God might actually be angry with Moses?
Behunchud 3 years ago
According to Christian tradition, Exodus was written by Moses, so your saying that because Moses said it that it's dubious is ridiculous.
Really, you're denying Bible verses now? You're getting desperate.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: I am not denying anything. Read my comments above again. Seems to me that it's you whose desperate. I already convinced that Numbers 20 instance was for Moses and Aaron based on the evidence from verse 24. It's you who is denying Bible verses when you deny this verse. Read my question again and try to answer it. I bet you can't.
Behunchud 3 years ago
"Deut reference is also very weak, as it's Moses who's saying this not God"
Yes, you are denying it.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: I meant that this verse as your evidence is weak for Numbers 20 is weak. You just like going in circles. If you're not denying verse 24 then what would you say is referring to in the same chapter of Numbers 20. Nevermind what Deut is saying, tell me what God says earlier in Numbers 20 and then again in verse 24 to Aaron and then give me your interpretation?
Behunchud 3 years ago
And while I would, if I thought it would help, be quite willing to quote the entire book of numbers, Some Answered Questions, Thief in the Night, and the Quran, unless and until you are willing to come face to face with one fact a barrage of others will do no good.
You still haven't even admitted that my reference from Deut. 3:26 proves that which you denied, that God would become wroth with Moses and Aaron for the sake of Israel's misdeeds, not their own.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: I think you are trying too hard. You are looking for evidence to fit Abdul Baha's interpretation. I am not following anyone's interpretation, I encourage you to read this chapter again from start to finish without any pre-conceived ideas of what this might be pointing to.
Behunchud 3 years ago
You continue to just read the same part over and over again and, instead of providing any real evidence, simply assert that it means what you think it means. This is not supporting your evidence with fact, that's just the fallacy "argumentum ad nauseum" where you're just repeating yourself over and over.
It's a simple thing I've asked. Provide me a place where it *says that it is literal*
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
All you're saying over and over again is that if you interpret it literally it looks literal, which makes no sense whatsoever.
The instance at a different time illustrates my point that God *did* in fact become "wroth" with them because of what the Israelis did, an instance which shows that not only could it happen, but *did*.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
what is the problem with interpreting it literally. why can't be interpreted literally .? give us a valid reason supported by evidence please.
annakarenina100 3 years ago
I already gave my reasons Anna look down.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
"The instance at a different time illustrates my point that God *did* in fact become "wroth" with them because of what the Israelis did, an instance which shows that not only could it happen, but *did*. "
But that was a different setting and time and circumstances.
annakarenina100 3 years ago
You're missing the point. It proves that it *did happen*. The argument that our friend Behunchud was making was that God *wouldn't* do that, that it *didn't* ever happen and in fact *couldn't* happen. This disproves that.
PeterJDeer 3 years ago
Peter: I never said that it couldn't happen, nor did I asserted that that God wouldn't do that (God is all powerful and can do anything). However, in THIS instance it *didn't* happen. I have already given you my evidence to which proves quite blatantly that it didn't happen. Furthermore, Deut reference is also very weak, as it's Moses who's saying this not God. This could many things, perhaps Moses was getting frustrated and was fed up and was trying to bring people in order.....
Behunchud 3 years ago
... One can't be certain what Moses said is exactly what God felt as well. Again, do not misunderstand, I am not saying that it can't happen as Moses says but I am sure that it didn't happen in Numbers 20 as those are God's words, not Moses.
Behunchud