Example from Quran 5:90 O YOU who have attained to faith! Intoxicants, and games of chance, and idolatrous practices, and the divining of the future are but a loathsome evil of Satan's doing:' shun it, then, so that you might attain to a happy state! 5:91 By means of intoxicants and games of chance Satan seeks only to sow enmity and hatred among you, and to turn you away from the remembrance of God and from prayer. Will you not, then, desist?
Back then thre were no religion when Yahshua walk the earth, reigion happen after his death and he was a Palestinian Jew. There were nowhite faces on that land at that time was hollywood want you all to believe because all that land according to GOD was AFRICA. People if that had was people of color of shades of brown light and dark. There was no blure eyes wih blonde hair man jesus. In franch they wroship a BLACK Jeus and a Black Mary and you cn find that on You Tube as well.
@NubianQueenNEFERTITI Those with a pure heart see God, Jesus is God manifested in the flesh! Jesus is blue eyed, light to medium brown hair & in His presence is perfect peace! Jesus was not the statis quo of that day or any other time. I met The Lord face to face many times if you haven't it is because you do not have a pure heart!
Jesus is not a Muslim but Muslims do believe in Jesus(He is a prophet for all).
but i really do believe that calling Jesus "Palestinian" is more proper because the people of Bethlehem do call there selves Palestinians and refuse to be called Israelis.
Im going to answer your other questions later because I don't want to throw all this stuff and your face to the point you have to respond with 5-6 comments' Oh and the reason I asked you if you are from California(Yes I am from California) is because "187" is a murder code in Los Angeles that Crips, Bloods and Mexican gangsters use in their slang.
@QuantumUni The Israelites did interpret it the Islamic way LMAO, Proof?
KJV John1:19-21"Jews sent priests and Levites to question him (JOHN), Who art thou? And he confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not.
ART THOU THAT PROPHET? And he answered No"
The Jews were waiting for three people 1.The Messiah 2:Elias/Elijah 3: THAT PROPHET.
This is muhammed. The prophet prophecised by Moses, and later by Jesus.
NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, LATIN and GREEK." John 19:19-20
@QuantumUni So what if the sign was written in 3 languages. Go to nearly any country in the world and you'll see signs in English. Are these all English speaking countries? No. Thats an absurd point.
You failed to answer me yet again. The sign of Jonah? How could the Church get it so wrong? Author of Acts or the word of Jesus? Which do you believe?
You won't answer because to do so would prove the problem with Christian doctrine.
@QuantumUni If you say Jesus you cannot hold to your arguement using Acts as your proof. If you say Author of Acts you contradict your God. Pretty bad position you've got yurslef into,lol.
Ok well lets go further. Many scholars now believe that all the authors of the Gospels borrowed from Mark. Mark himself borrowed from the Q Gospel/Book. Who wrote this Q? Where is this Q? Lol. Scholars have concocted the Q Gospel because of the errors and inconsistencies within the Gospels.
@Saracen187. I don't have a clue about the point in your last to comments their just rants, attacks and subjective thought so.....Also I really need you ro try in refute Peter I'm waiting to see that, OH WAIT--------> "Well your Bible is corrupted anyway"!
@QuantumUni It means that YOUR scholars have had to make up an imaginary book to act as a source for the first three Gospels. John is different to the other three in its time lines and stories, so this isn't even included in the Q theory.
Why would YOUR scholars need to do this? Does the word of God need imaginary books to put it into context?
Its a mess, just admit it. Stop beating around the bush and face the obvious.
Also Sacren I can easily refute Deut 18:18 with the context of Deut 18:16. The LORD is making a promise to send a series of prophets to speak in his name since the Israelites were afraid of God's presence so he will conuntinue to send a series of prophets and also gives the test to tell if one is false or not. Peter being a Jew also agrees with me and refutes you in Acts 3:22-25. Brethen is never used with context of another seed except israelites in the Bible also
@QuantumUni No, the bretheren in this case is not a Jew and is definately not Jesus. Moses says "like unto me". So we have a bretheren of the Jews, who has much in common with Moses, that comes from a foolish and insignificant people so as to make the Jews jealous. I wonder who he's talking about?? lmao
Its the only clear prophecy you have and you don't get it. Keep performing mental gymnastics with the rest and disregard the obvious.
@Saracen187, All Jews and early Jewish Christians for 4 thousands year knew that Deut 18:18 is the context of a series of israelite prophets, I refuted you with Peter(him being a Jew) do I need the Talmud? Go look at Jewish theology. Muslims like to lie and twist the Bible to fit in their false arabian-gentile prophet.
@QuantumUni The Church has fashioned the Bible to try and get all prophecises to fit Jesus. This is why you have trouble with inconsistencies and contradictions. You did not refute me with Peter I'm still awaiting your response on my comment which means I have refuted you becuase you have no comeback.
You call Islam false yet your book calls it "of God". Now you go contrary to you Book as well as the word of Jesus lol.
@Saracen187, First all stop lying, I responded, I refuted you with Peter because he refuted you also and represented the Jewish theological interpretation of Deut 18:18 which in context is a series of israelite(brethen) prophets from Moses and on that God promised to send according to all that happened in Horeb(Deut 18:16 for context) don't lie. You seem to have no idea what "refuting" is. The Chruch did not fashion prophecies since Jesus quoted them himself! even your apologist know that!
@QuantumUni I will now show why you and your Jewish/christian scholars are wrong on Deut 18:18. Deut 32:21 tells us God will move his people (JEWS) to jealousy by raising another nation. So the prophecy is not one for Israelites as it is about another nation. Brethren means brothers. Arabs and Jews speak almost the same language, are both semetic and originate from Abraham/Ibrahim. God says "from amongst their bretheren", this is a collective term. Bretheren of the JEWS are Arabs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@Saracen187, Deut 17:15 destroys your view that brethen is referring to someone else other than israelites and if it is then it must be a series of ishmaelite prophets only and never a israelite. You distorted Deut 32:21, God starts speaking in verse 20 and verse 19 lets you know it's him speaking. Jews provoked God to jealously by thier idols and he wanted to return a just favor by those who are "NOT A NATION" and those of a "FOOLISH NATION" this cannot be the ishmaelites as you can see.
@QuantumUni Do I also need to point out that you are back pedalling here??? You claimed it was all about Israelites, NOW you say it might be Ismaelites.
God says "From amongst their bretheren". Whose bretheren? The JEws. If he said your bretheren to moses you might assume he ment a Jew. But he said THEIR BRETHEREN. This are indeed the Arabs/Ismaelites.
I already said that the Bible contains Gods word but it is not all Gods word and thus has been corrupted. I can believe in what some of the...
@Saracen187, You are distorting my position by mis-readings. My point in Deut is that the religious and historical interpretation of 18:18 which in context starting from verse 16 according to what happen in HOREB that God would continue to send prophets in his name. If "brethen" is the "ishmaelites" then israeli prophets should not exist! I wiped out any reference to a foreign nation and gave the contextual usage of "brethen" to mean israelites by quoting Deut 17:15 which uses the same phrase.
@QuantumUni Ok, again I will REFUTE your cliam regarding Deut 18:18 along with 17:15.
We read in 18:18 that God refers to the Jews as a collective "their bretheren".So the prophet in question will come from outside the Jews but from a nation recognised as their brothers. God specifically refers to a PROPHET. this is a repeat of Gods word in 18:15 which states that the prophet will come from a nation other than the Jews but from their midst. The Jews are then told to "hearken unto him".
@Saracen187, The meaning of Deut 18:18 your giving me is false, their is no mention of another nation but "among your brethren" which are the 12 tribes of Israel. Where in the world do you get the idea that this refers to a gentile nation/seperate nation? Their is no evidence in the text to support that. 17:15 refuted you because "among your brethen" like 18:18 is used to refer to "israelite" brethen among the tribes.
@QuantumUni It seems you are unable to read properly. 18:18 says their bretheren NOT your bretheren KJV Bible. This is God talking to Moses about the Jews. This means a nation OTHER THAN the Jews. 17:15 is talking about a different individual, A KING. It is a different subject to 18:18 and thus a different context.
SO you see my points are in context and YOUR are NOT.
I did'nt say MIDST ment outside of. The arabs lived AMONG the Jews. They were in their MIDST, or amidst the Jews.
@Saracen187, No this does not refer to a foreign nation and when I quoted "your brethen" I was talking about 18:15 NOT 18:18 nice distortion :), you don't know how to read contextual. When God speaks to Moses it's in private, Moses was a PROPHET. Moses spoke to the israelites on God's behalf from verse 18:15-16 and then from verse 17 to 22 he quotes what God told him directly in private according to what "you" desired in Horeb( verse 16) he would raise up a prophet from amond "their" brethen".
@QuantumUni You are chopping and changing your view and now you are telling me what I was originally telling LMAO. Is this some kind of reverse psychology tactic, or a Jedi mind trick, ROFL.
You are reading OUT OF CONTEXT AGAIN!
17:15 talks of a king as they have in other nations.
@QuantumUni Who are you to say what is an acceptable timeframe for the lineage of prophets? LMAO
EVERYONE knows the BIBLE is corrupt. The reasons I will not accept certain verses has nothing to do with my religion. As an atheist the arguements I make are still valid. I don't accept verses which contradict the teachings of Jesus. If Jesus says 10 times don't preach to Gentiles and then in 1 place he says do, then I go with the first 10. This is a logical approach. Christianity doesn't do logic!!
@Saracen187, When Moses said those words their were no Arabs there, they were in a remote location near Sinai and the wilderness, just the 12 tribes. They did not mix with gentiles. Arabs did not live among the Jews.
@QuantumUni Are Palestinians Arab? Yes. Are they the Philistines mentioned in the Bible? Yes. Where Jews scattered in the Nations? Yes. Were these Jews scattered amongst the arab nations? YES. Is 18:18 specific about a location? NO. Did it say Judea,Jerusalem?NO.
No one said the last prophet would come from Judea.
@Saracen187, Palestine are not Philistines! Of course you would make this error!, it's like saying Iranians are Arabs! Palestine is a name given by the Romans to replace the name "Israel" or at best this is what they called that region. Philistines are descendants of Grecian sea-faring more related to Greeks and not Semite nor spoke Arabic. Most people make this false distinction because the two names sound similar. Philistines did not come in contact when Israelites during the days of Moses.
@QuantumUni Of course modern day Palestinians are descendants of the Phillistines. The original philistines are a mixture of a coastal, meditteranean people and the canaanites. Some even think they may be egyptian. Again the origin is not known for certain but the philistines of old are the palestinians of new.
There was no Israel before the Balfour Declaration. When the Babylonians took modern day Israel split between the 12 tribes. Children of Israil refers to Isaac not a country!!!
@Saracen187, No they are not descendents! "Palestine" is a name from the Romans. Philistines are semitic at all. Israel was a nation since Joshua conquered it! Have you read the Tanakh, book of Joshua!? Joshua divided the land among the tribes not to long after Moses death! look at all your historical errors and you have the nerve to "LMAO" at me ahahaha
@QuantumUni Joshua called it Israel? Where's the verse?
Before he settled in the land as they crossed thru Jordan into Jericho "there came men in hither tonight of the Children of Israel" Jos2:2.
There was no land called Israel. It referred to the children of Isaac/Israel.
You really haven't got a clue. You claims are not supported by your Bible.
The Philistines landed in modern Israel and mixed with the indigenous people. They all bcame known as Philistines. The indigenous people were semetic!
@Saracen187, Philistines for the last time are not Semitic! Give me some sources Your so ignorant! Also what ever you want to call the land it belonged to the Israelites!
@QuantumUni17:15 regarding the KING. This KING would rule over the Jews once they were a NATION. This means once they had settled in the promised Land. Moses governed them whilst they wandered the desert.
Likewise 18:18 is not concerned the time they spent wandering the wilderness. It is a promise of something that will happen in the future. As this was mentioned after 17:15 it is logical that this eventuality would happen after they had settled. When they settled they mixed with Gentiles&Arabs
@Saracen187, You are way off my points, Im not concerned with the context of 18:18, 18:15 or 17:15 but the way " your brethen" is used to refer to israelites in both verses and not another race of people, these verses do not speak of an outer people. You are not giving a good exgesis. Peter disagree with you(knew Isa personally), Hebrews disagree with you, Christians do and I do. No one has interpreted these verses this way. 18:18 is a series of prophets ranging from Moses to John the Baptist.
@Saracen187, Remember Sacren187, Most Jewish scholars agree with my interpretation cocerning Deut 18:18 and the surrounding text so IM RIGHT! DON"T YOU REMEMBER IN THE PRIVATE MESSAGE!
@QuantumUni If the Jews at the time of Jesus believe Deut as I did, give me your proof otherwise. I gave you the verse which clearly shows that the Jews were expecting another prophet as prophecised in the OT other than the Messiah and Elias/Elijah. Muhammed is "that Prophet" John1:19-21.
Who were they asking about?
Who is this prophet? What previous prophecy were they referring to?
You can't answer because your faith has taken all prophecies to mean Jesus, but we see the Jews thought otherwise
@Saracen187, If Muhammad was "that prophet' or of the "prophet hood" spoken in Deut 18:18 they would have searched for an Arab not an Israeli. Also John the baptist completed the role of Elijah as well (MAtthew 11:13-15). Here let me act like you "OWNED"!!!!!!!!!
@QuantumUni Yes the Jews may have misinterpreted Duet 18:18 to mean an Israelite but Deut 32:21 clearly tells us that the prophet will come "from a foolish nation" to move the "Jews to jealousy".
@Saracen187, I don't mean to bust in here, Yeshua taught that John the Baptist completed the role of Elijah, he did not teach that John was a reincarnation of Elijah, don't insert contradictions. Also the Quran teaches that "son of God" is a saying from the mouths of men and a gross lie, I don't think I need to quote the verses. So you cannot trust 1 John, plus it is not a relevant to Islamic theolgy since Muhammad said he was in the "gospel". So why are you behind this epistle?
@LogosTheos Happy to discuss, no worries. your esponse doesn't answer the question is posted. Why did John say he was not elijah and Jesus says he was?
Jesus also claimed John was the most powerful of all prophets born of a womb. Was he more powerful than Jesus and Moses?
My comment is not a contradiction unless you can prove it is,lol.
My reference to 1John5:1 shows that JEWS would often use the term Son of God to mean a GOOD PERSON. Not that it ment the actual Son of God.
@Saracen187, Thank you for responding, reincarnation is a eastern philosophy which of course is alien to Abrahamic theology( Judaism, Christianity, Islam). So we have to be careful they way we understand the language of Yeshua the Messiah. Luke talks about John the Baptist in more detail,Luke 1:17 states he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah. That's pretty much what Jesus meant. Also the real Elijah alongside Moses appeared to Yeshua in Luke 9:30.
@LogosTheos When Jesus was "resurrected", was he in his original form? Did he ever resume his original form?
Ok, so if Jesus ment that, how come John knew nothing about it? And what made John so great?
By stating "When we call Jesus "the" son of God this is to express his uniqueself." You are going against Christian doctrine or following a new one. John calls Jesus Gods only begotten son. Some bibles read "Unique" son becos schools have move from believing him the son of God.
@Saracen187, It's pretty much the same, Jesus was sinless and pre-existent, this is unique from the rest of us. Monogensis is translated as 'only' but in Hebrew thought it means unique, not "only" in a literal English sense, let me show you why, let's travel back in time to Abraham. Genesis 2:22, Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Isaac wasn't Abraham's "only" son literally, Ishmael was the first born.
@LogosTheos Well, i'm not sure what your saying in your first post bro. Either you believe Jesus is the Son of God or you don't. The "uniquesness" of Jesus is an apologetics arguement out of the Son of God scenario, as it was never claimed by Jesus himself in the manner in which Christians portray it. Unless of course you are a Unitarian Christian?
@Saracen187, Yea I believe Jesus is "the" Son of God with the definite article, But I am also "a" son of God with the indenfinite article. The difference between me and Jesus is that he was the Messiah and sinless which is what makes him unique, I am just a normal person. Jesus taught that we can be sons of God too by doing the will of the Father(Matthew 5:44-45).
@Saracen187, The man did not know Jesus but called him "good master", Yeshua did not want that man to go around everyday and say that to rabbis especially if he didn't know them. There is none good but God, the eternal light of Heaven and man if only good in relation to God not man of himself since he knows good through God. Yeshua did the will of the Father perfectly.
@LogosTheos sorry but your interpretation of the Good Master scenario is weak and only made to defend against my arguement. There is no way you can come to your conclusion from what is written in the verse.
Christians re-interpret plain English because it does not agree with their theology.
@Saracen187, I have to respecfully disagree, that is the only interpretation and I don't think it is weak since it is in harmony with the rest of the text. But if you have an interpretation other than this that doesn't contradict the sinless aspect of Yeshua please tell me. Also the reason I want to know the Quran is to see reality from the perception of a Muslim and see Islam as accurate as possible without presuppositions. I want to learn more of the Islamic position on Abrahamic theology.
@LogosTheos I don't see where in that verse you can qualify your comments. Please let me now.
what this verse proves is that Jesus clearly distinguishes himself from God both in person and righteousness, because no matter how good the person, no one is as good as God.
@Saracen187, So John is not Elijah in the literal sense, and regarding son of God some Jews understood it and some did not out of ignorance. And yes it can mean good person or servant. It expresses that a child behaves like his father and when we do the works of God we are called his children. The term expresses our close spiritual relationship to God, who is like a Father. When we call Jesus "the" son of God this is to express his unique self. Are you from California? ------->187?
@Saracen187, I don't know what form Jesus had when he rose from the dead. But the gospels say when he appeared he was without scars and no holes in his hands from the nails. Also John saw his heavenly form in a vision --> Revelation 1:13-16. I don't know, does the Quran teach about Elijah going to heaven on a chariot? How did Elijah go to Heaven in a physical form? These things are a mystery.
@LogosTheos We are told in the Bible that Jesus returned to the disciples as a different person. They could not recognise him but came to understand that he was Jesus.
So, ressurection is when the same person dies and comes back to life in the same physical self. Reincarnation is the return of a dead person in a different body.
Which of these is applicable to the return of Christ?
@Saracen187, Reincarnation is actually the return of a person in another physical life, a second life span where that person once again is born from the womb of a woman a clone image of his or her previous life, this is according to eastern msytic philosophy. Yeshua/Jesus was resurrected, according to Abrahamic theology God can raise the dead since he is infinite and does as he pleases. Elijah raised someone from the dead before in 1 Kings, I forgot the verse although, you can check.
@Saracen187, Hi friend, sry for the lag in response. Reincarnation takes two-life spans. When you are born from the womb as a baby and die as a man and then for an unknown period of time you're born again as a baby and then die as a man again this would be called reincarnation, 2 full life cycles. Yeshua wasn't born twice and he didn't appear as a baby twice in different time-lines. Yeshua was resurrected from his 'one' life to eternity with the Father, this is resurrection.
@LogosTheos But he was brought back looking like someone else according to the Bible. He died and was brought back to life. Resurrection is as the same person (physically and spiritually), reincarnation is the same soul but different body.
I could say that he went into the womb of the earth and was re-born.
We might agree that the pagan beliefs of reincarnation were too pagan so the authors of the resurrection chose to blur the lines.
@Saracen187, ((This is off subject sorry)) Do you know where can look up the most literal translation of the Quran online? I asked some fellow named Yahya Snow (he's some Muslim blogger) and he told me Hilali/Khan translation and im trying to look for a sight that has scholar exegesis on the side but can't find one your help will be appreciated!
@QuantumUni I will look at the links you ent and pm you back on those but regarding this debate. Your losing it friend. I admire the way you defend your faith but this obstinance will only lead you astray.
If you are so short-sided to quote Matt 7:21-23 as referring to Muhammed then you are way off course.
1John3-4 any prophet that claims Jesus is the Christ is of GOD. Islam does this and still you reject it by holding to the corrupt verses of man.
@QuantumUni from beginning to end we are told of another prophet that will come to the people. Moses tells you in 18:18. We are told how to recognise a true prophet in the verse above. And then Jesus talks about a Comforter/Holy spirit(prophet) that will lead men into all truth. Meaning a prophet witha revelation for all men covering all aspects of life. This is Islam.
Your book prophecises about him but you will not heed. Jesus said he came for the Jews and the comforter come for all men.
@Saracen187 Islam will bring you closer to Jesus than you are now. You won't have to believe that Jesus died for the wicked. That God sacrificed himself to himself in a manner that he had previously cursed and forbidden. did God then commit suicide? Isn't suicide abhorred by the church. Those that commit suicide can not enter heaven.
It is a story that doesn't make sense. And as such can only be the imaginings of man as God is all perfect and would not reveal confusion and contradiction to us.
@Saracen187, , You know what your crazy, I TOLD YOU 3 TIMES 17:15 AND 18:15 USES THE SAME CONTEXT AND PHRASE AS 18:18 "AMONG YOUR BRETHEN OR YOUR BRETHEN" TO DESCRIBE ISRAELITES! 18:18 DOES NOT refer to a seperate nation, you have not proved that so you do not qualify for that statement unless you fully refute my objections all the way through showing why this is not a seperate nation. What are you reading in the text? Why didn't israelites the islamic way for 4000 years? Even Muhammad didn't
@QuantumUni Once again you've been totally owned. All my evidence comes from your Bible. You deliberately distort the scripture to fit your nonsensical ideas. You even misquote and fabricate verses.
Your sources are rubbish and your responses not far off childish rantings.
Either conceed your error or withhold your comments. This is getting rather boring now, lmao
@Saracen187 , The gospel of John does not mention Muhammad, Muhammad did not come when the disciples were alive, he cannot abide forever and he cannot live in people, these are qualites of a spirit, the Holy Spirit(not Gabriel we don't believe that) not a man and this prophecy has already been fulfilled in Acts. Muhammad is not in the Bible because he is a liar.
@QuantumUni Where does it say that the Holy Spirit will come in the time of the disciples?
1John describes a prophet as a spirit. The holy spirit means holy prophet. Muhammed is the ONLY prophet to hold the title Holy Prophet, as Jesus is the only Christ. Of course all the prophets are holy just as all prophets are Messiahs, yet they each have a title unique to them. I suppose this is just a coincidence?
Muhammed is very much in the Bible you just deny him as the Jews denied Christ.
@Saracen187, John 14:25, 26: "All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Comforter, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name, will teach YOU all things and will remind you of everything I have said to YOU." He sent the holy spirit to the disciples.
@QuantumUni "But the Comforter/perycletos/praised one/Muhammed, the holy spirit/holy prophet/Muhammed, whom the Father will send in my name (Jesus is mentioned more than Muhammed in the Quran), will teach you all things (religion,social, economic,equality etc rules for all aspects of life=Quran) and remind you of everything I have said to you(see above)."
Quantumpuny, you are a joke. As is your faith. You have not proved anything to me other than how brainwashed you.
@Saracen187, Muhammad is not the comforter and never will be, he cannot dwell in people, he cannot abide forever, and he did not come while the disciples were alive. In John 1:19 and on the Jews whent to an ISRAELITE not an ARAB. They were wrong about Christ and the prophet being two different individuals. Here the proof THE PROPHET( John 6:14-15) and THE MESSIAH (John 1:41 and John 1:45) Muhammad was neither.
@QuantumUni Did Jesus say the comforter would dwell in people? If it was the HOLY SPIRIT as you define it, it was already with Jesus. Jesus had already given it to the disciples when he sent them out to heal the sick.
Jesus said "if i do not go HE will not come".
If the spirit was already with Jesus and the disciples, why did Jesus have to go?
Just cos you say your right, doesn;t make you right and just bcos some scholars think he spoke Greek doesn't mean he did, especially if MOST scholars agree with me and think he didn't.
Its ridiculous that you would send me that link. You obviously didn't read it properly before you decided to cut and paste,LMAO!!!!!!
@QuantumUni Deut 17:15 is not talking of a prophet but a KING, to rule over the Jews as the KINGS that exist in other in other nations. This line means that it is not the Messiah or a prophet as these are not in existence in other nations. This is Moses talking to the Jews. Moses is saying he will choose a king from amongst them who is not a stranger (he must be a Jew).
@Saracen187, My point of 17:15 was not the verse itself but the contextual usage of "among your brethren" to refer to israelites. You have not given a great contextual argument especially with "midst" when the literal translation is קֶ֫רֶב(Kehreb) literally according to strongs #7129-- the inward part, within or a body of such, it does not mean outside or surrounding not even in ENGLISH. Your confusing it with AMIDST so this doesn't prove your point at all.
@QuantumUni So the mentioned bretheren will be living/existing amidst/amongst the Jews. This is WITHOUT DOUBT a prophecy concerning the Ismaelites/Arabs. The subsequent description of this prophet fits Muhammed like a glove.
The King/Ruler chosen by Moses was Judah if memory serves. He was a jew from amongst the children of Israel i.e not a stranger.
The Jews are also commanded to follow this Prophet from their bretheren. Whomever does not, Deut 18:19 "I will require it of him."
@QuantumUni This is God warning the Jews they had best listen to this prophet even though is not one of them.
Your weak excuse that if "bretheren" means Ishmaelite then there should be no Israili prophets is ridiculous. The Bible doesn't say ALL prophets will be arabs. It only says it for this one mentioned in Deut 18:18.
@QuantumUni I am not confused, its your bad English. Muslims agree that all the prophets were hebrew so this is in keeping with my point. The only prophet who was not a hebrew was Muhammed, yet they were ALL SEMETIC.
Again you misquote me. I said Koine Greek was COMMON GREEK and the BIBLE was not written in COMMON Greek. Were the disciples scholars of Greek? NO.
I asked for your source regarding the Jewish tombs and being written in Greek as opposed to Jewish, LOL. U must have forgotten!!!!
@Saracen187, One of the biggest problems is you forgetting the context starting from verse 16, they desired men to speak on God's behalf since they were afraid of his great glory and presence, God said "what you have spoken is good" so he would "raise up a prophet" from among your brethen according to what you desired in Horeb, Not 3000 years later after they are dead. This passage was the beginning of the seal of prophets that he would countinue to send on his behalf, prophets for generations.
@QuantumUni Bible says if it is in accordance with the teachings of Muhammed as we are told that the teachings of Jesus Moses and previous prophets are revelations of God. Just because John contains some truth doesn't mean its all good.
Aramaic was spoken amongst the semetic people, i never claimed it was a global language. Irrelevant statement you make. If Pontius ruled this part of the world it is logical he may well have learned the language.
@Saracen187, I did not give an irrelavant statement, you wondered if Pontius Pilate could speak Aramaic, I eliminated that by showing it was not a common used language especially with gentiles and other provinces, the biggest proof is that it's dead, so how is that irrelavant to the subject matter? A Roman appointed judge is highly doubhtful to speak this langauge coming from and raised in the gentiles parts of the Roman Empire especially with a translator not present.
@QuantumUni I didn't say the Bible was written in Koine Greek, you did. I said it isn't written in Koine Greek so if that was the greek used by the disciples then they couldn't have written the Gospels as the Greek used therein is much more sophisticated.
Aramac was predominantly spoken by Jews, correct, but that doesn;'t mean Pontius couldn't have learned it. History states that Romans spoke Latin not Greek. Does that mean Jesus also knew Latin? You have no evidence you have your assumptions.
@Saracen187, What manuscript proof do you have? You don't even know Biblical Greek nor it's history and evolution. Koine Greek was actually the less sophisticated form of classical Greek, you just made a great error by saying it's the more complex version, check your information please. The originals were written in all capitals with no accents,breathing marks or spaces. I don't make assumptions I provide evidence, Your lying because you say history states that Roman spoke Latin only and not....
@QuantumUni ACTs and Isiaiah, Acts and Isiaiah. You quote from anonymous scripture and unsubstantiated prophecy. I quote to you the words of Jesus, your Lord, your God and you don't accept his words. If you don't even believe what your Lord and Saviour has commanded, what chance have you got?
You trap yourself with your foolish statements and irrational conclusions.
Open your eyes, your mind and your heart. If you reject even the words of your own prophet you are beyond lost!!!!!
@Saracen187, Your personal attacks and subjection is a sign weakness so drop it, I quoted the words of Jesus and Messianic prophecies but you apply and force Islamic theology in the scriptures and twist his words! Do you know that Jesus quoted the prophet Isaiah all the time? because Jesus was the fullfillment of messianic prophecy and wants the WHOLE WORLD to be saved? Their are no clearer words then that from my Lord and Savior who desires ALL man to be saved Jew and Gentile!
@QuantumUni You have not wuoted Jesus only Isaiah and Acts. NOT Jesus. This is not about his Messianic status so why mention Jesus quoted from Isaiah? Are you changing the arguement again? If it is so clear then where is your irrefutable proof? You have none because i have quoted from the Bible to refute your claims.
Why did he not want to preach to or heal the Samaritans or the Canaanites? If he wouldn't do it himself, why do you think he would send others?
@Saracen187, So I guess I have to quote Jesus instead of Isaiah the prophet eh? But what about Jesus quoting Isaiah and the prophets demonstrating the prophecies being fullfilled in him and of his mission? Matthew 13:14, Matthew 22:44, Matthew 26:13, Luke 4:18, Luke 7:27, John 6:45 and on. Muhammad never quoted a "single" prophet! And I find it funny how you talk about "lost injill" But Deedat, Zakir and Shabir although always force Muhammad in the present gospels specifically "Gospel of John".
@QuantumUni The Quran refers to many of the Bibles prophets and even has a chapter dedicated to the "worthiest of all women", Mary. This honour is not afforded her in the Church as she is female and we know how St Paul feels about women don't we!!!! She is hardly even mentioned in the Bible.
We muslims believe that the Bible still retains some truth, there is no arguement there. The Bible has been corrupted but its not total fabrication.
get educated idiot, "muslim" means "one who submits (to God)" so if a muslim says jesus and abraham and whatnot was a muslim, they are basically right since they all submited to God.
Notice how you didn't respond to acts but gave me ignorance, instead of actually trying to debunk my proofs you say "Oh well the Bible is written by an unknown author" which I have refuted and refuted with proofs and you refuse to believe it simple because Luke "didn't write his signature".To show your inconsistent arguments keep and mind we don't even know the 'names' of the individuals who complied the Quran. Their are in existence more data for who wrote the Bible than for the Quran.
@QuantumUni There is NO data for the names of all those who wrote the Bible, lmao. Where's your proof?? You still have to answer my question about Acts 8:25 and the contradicting order given by Jesus. Who is right and who is wrong? Lol, keep side stepping. You failed to address the Sign of Jonah prophecy. lmao, couldn't get out of that one so you disregarded it.
Your arguements are weak and your attempts at refuting me are laughable.
@Saracen187, I'm not going to tell you again Acts 8:25 THROUGH 35! refutes your objection of Jesus not wanting the disciples to preach to gentiles, he command Philip(original disciple) in verse 29 and quotes Isaiah 53 preaching Jesus death and resurrection to the Ethopian gentiles who embraced Jewish beliefs.
@QuantumUni Hahahaha, you couldn't trap you foot in the door my friend never mind a muslim. I asked you a question. If Acts8:25 says Philip preached to Samaritans and Jesus told his disciples explicitly not to go unto the Samaritans. WHO DO YOU BELIEVE? WHO IS WRONG?The fact you are quoting greek words should give you an idea as to the origin of your book!!!If you think you can prove that the Gospels were written by the disciples you're better than your scholars,lol, and we both know your not!
@Saracen187, The disciples knew Greek! Greek was a common language and Judea for travel, trade and communication with Romans and within the Roman Empire! it was a multilingual society, Jews interacted with Greeks all the time!. Their is already Biblical, historical and archaeological evidence for that! Biblical proof( John 12:20-21,John 19:19-20, Acts 9:29, and more) Most Jewish funeral tob inscriptions from 300 B.C. to 500 A.D. were in GREEK 70% of them while 12% Latin and 18% Hebrew/Aramaic!
@QuantumUni How is it then that historians tell us Jesus spoke Aramaic? If Greek was so prevalent in Jewish society, why did Jesus not speak it? I agree Greek was spoken widely, but amongst the merchants and traders and higher echalons of society. The poor had no need for it. Give me your source for your Jewish tomb statistics, lmao!!
@Saracen187 , Jesus spoke Greek here the proof, No translator when speaking to Roman governer of Judea Pontius Pilate(Mark 15:2-5; Matthew 27:11-14; Luke 23:3; John 18:33- 38) No Translator when he spoke to Roman centurion(Matt.8:5-13). Jesus spoke to Greek woman (Mark 7:26). Greek was a language that united all cultures of the Roman Empire similar to U.S. or in the U.K whereas the english language united all the culture. It's for neutral communication apart from everyone's own ethnic language.
@QuantumUni According to the Bible Jesus and Pontius were alone in the room. Who else was there to record the conversation? How do we know the Roman didn't speak Aramaic as well? The Greek woman was living in Jerusalem, how do we know she didn't speak Aramaic?
@Saracen187, LOL! Aramaic is a dead language now and by that you know it wasn't widely spoken. Pontius Pilate is not from Judea so logically he would not speak Aramaic but Latin or Greek as most Romans who are gentiles would. And Yes it was possible for the woman to speak greek.
@QuantumUni everyday greek. It is not the Greek of scholars, writer, orators or emperors. This is why your theory that the disciples wrote the Gospels is wrong. The Gospels were not written in common Greek.
The Greek woman lived in Jerusalem and propbably spoke Aramaic well.
There is nowhere in the Bible that suggests Jesus spoke Greek. You made that up to prove a point. Stick to facts please!!!!
I know the man Phillip spoke to in Acts 8:26-39 is ethiopian. I referred you to Acts 8:25......
@Saracen187, The NT was written in koine greek, you just gave me a statement not followed by evidence. You just said that their is no where in the Bible that "suggest" Jesus spoke greek??? But I just!........ I just gave you the evidence with Pontius Pilate and the Greek woman that "suggest" so! plus historical evidence like the Greek LXX translation used by hellenistic Jews in Jerusalem before Jesus time and physical greek incriptions on tombs 70% and other data that shows Greek spoken.
@QuantumUni We can assume that when Jesus spoke with Pontius there was someone else there as it is written in the third person. If you say no, then how do we know what happened? Some Gospels say Jesus did not say a word, another said he responded to Pontius' remarks, contradiction???lol
LXX, written by greek speaking Jews or just greeks? Jeruslaem or Rome or Constantinople?
I asked for you source concerning the Jewish tombs and their greek inscriptions. Where is it? lol
@Saracen187...........and not Greek what are your sources? And you accuse me of assumptions? What are your sources that comfirm that Latin was not spoken along with Greek by Romans? Passion of the Christ LOL!
@Saracen187, They were not Samaritans in Acts they were Ethiopians man, the ones Philip spoke to, Acts is after the events of the gospels!. Jesus came for all man first the jew and then the gentiles because it is said ALL nations will be blessed through Abraham! which carried through isaac and last Jesus! Your summary is childish and a waist of keyboard life.
@QuantumUni Don#t change what I said, thats dishonest of you!!!! Acts 8:25 states that the disciples preached to the SAMARITANS. This is contrary to the commands of JESUS MATT10:5 ""Don't go to the Gentiles or the Samaritans" NLT.
So Acts is preaching contrary to the orders of Christ. Jesus never helped Samaritans (or Gentiles) and he didn't want his disciples to either. This destroys the theology of Jesus for the World.
Your religion is not supported by your prophet. You lose all day every day
@Saracen187, You're contradicting your own points and refuting yourself for me. Yes in Acts8:25 Peter is preaching to the gentiles as commanded by Jesus (Mattthew 24:14). Jesus was sent to the house of israel first and to the gentiles. Acts 8:25 shows that your interpretation of Matthew 10:5 is false and not in harmonization with the gospels.
@QuantumUni My point about Acts is this. If the author of acts is reciting a tale about disciples preaching to Gentiles, it is in direct contradiction of the commandment of Jesus Matt 10:5. There is no way to mis-interpret Matt 10:5"Jesus sent out the twelve apostles with these instructions: "Don't go to the Gentiles or the Samaritans, 10:6 "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel"
How can ANYONE mis-interpret this???
The Samaritans are JEWS. Why did Jesus not preach to them also?
@Saracen187, It is not in contradiction at all, ALL which in Greek is πᾶς(pas) which is literally EVERYTHING. After his death he commanded them to go to the gentiles. Jesus was sent to the house of israel first and the time had not come for the message to be spread to the gentiles until after he completed his mission on the cross and saved israel and then israel would bless all nations as promised by God through Abraham which is in Jesus Christ by sending his disciples into the world.
@QuantumUni Jesus NEVER once says GO TO THE GENTILES. He says go in to the nations. This was to preach to the scattered jews IN THE NATIONS! I have given you proof of this from your BIBLE.
Jesus never said I have come for the JEws and then the WORLD.
Matthew 15:24 Jesus answered and said, ‘I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel’. ONLY THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL!!!
Jesus did not fulfill his mission. He was sent to Bani Israel and they did not accept him.
@Saracen187, He never said go to the gentiles? Acts 9:15, Matthew 24:14. He did, once again your trying to implement false islamic theology into the Bible, no one interprets these scriptures this way only muslims. Not Christians are any theologians before and after the time of Muhammad. Your false interpretation is a contradiction and you cannot reconcile with other verses where Jesus says PREACH TO ALL CREATURES so your poor excuse is "oh well it's corrupted".
@QuantumUni The OT does not allow human sacrifice. Any one hung to die is cursed. You attribute these things to Jesus? Thats blasphemy!!!
Matt 12:7 "God desires mercy, not sacrifice."Matt 9:13 I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Sacrifice is not part of his message either!! Read the Book without your Pauline preconceptions and you will see that Jesus had nothing to do with what you've been taught.
@Saracen187, False context and twisted meanings, doesn't it say in both the OT and Quran that Abraham offered his son to be sacrificed? Jesus was cursed for our transgressions as prophecised by the Prophet Isaiah in ch 53 and Psalms 22. Jesus sacrificed his life for us not to demons as the pagans did you interpretation is false as usual. Sacrificing not part of the message? Jesus said their is no greater love for a man to lay down his life for his friends! We sacrifice for God daily you point?
@QuantumUni It does say that Abraham offered his son but God did not allow Abraham to sacrifice his son. I REFUTE you YET AGAIN. This is not proving your point.
So God was cursed? Jesus is God right? God was cursed? Interesting theory,LMFAO!
Laying down a life for a friend does not constitute sacrifice. Where did you learn English?
You claim Jesus sacrificed himself for you, but who did he sacrifice himself to? ANSWER PLEASE!!
@Saracen187, Sacrifice is to give up something of yours or something else for the benefit of another for good, neutral or evil reasons. This is the literal meaning, it is not restricted and is varied, such examples: love sacrifice, animal sacrifice, sacrificing amount, list goes on. I'm not suprised you made this mistake since you did the same thing with "midst" and "amidst".
@QuantumUni I know what sacrifice means, but you said "Jesus said their is no greater love for a man to lay down his life for his friends!" to justify his human sacrifice for the sins of man. So your general defininiton of sacrifice is not relevant here. I told you that this verse means a different sort of sacrifice, not a HUMAN one.
@QuantumUni the pm@s you sent were weak and stated that most scholars didn't believe Jesus spoke Greek. Yet becos SOME scholars think he did you believe this proves your point.
Thats laughable!!!!
You are an illiterate, lol. I taught you the meaning of sacrifice. you are another christian liar that has no fear of their Lord because just like the Church you lie. Bare faced and unabashed.
@QuantumUni Now when Jesus says "Many will say unto me on that day "Lord,Lord have we not prophecised in your name? and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?" And I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." Matt 7:21-23
who does Jesus mean? The Jews? No. The Muslim? No. The Hindu? No
@Saracen187, Matthew 7:21-23 is referring to false followers like Muhammad who is a great example of this passage, putting lies in the mouth of my Lord Isa whom he never met nor spoke his language.
@Saracen187, Now you want to talk about the crusades? My point was on spot Muhammad does not believe Jesus is Lord/Kurios so he is false. Jesus did not rebuke them because they called him Lord but the fact that they did not keep his Father's commandments ---> 1 John 3:23, Muhammad failed and therfore he is false.
@QuantumUni YOU are MISREADING 1John 1-4 and inserting your own words. This is BLASPHEMY!! If this is so easy for you to do just arguing with me, imagine how much easier for the Church who have a vested interest in propogating lies!!
1John1-4 states that a prophet which claims "JESUS is the CHRIST is of God".
It does not state Jesus is Lord or God. This is a gross misrepresentation on your part.
Therefore Muhammed stated the truth which means he is of God.
@Saracen187, I did not quote 1 John 1-4, I quoted 1 John 3:23, Muhammad does not believe Jesus is the son of God. 1 John as a whole refutes Muhammad. And speaking of misquoting first 1 John 1-4 says nothing like that, That's 1 John 4 and it states he who believes "Christ has come in the Flesh is of God", This was a reponse to the gnostic heresy who believe Jesus did not have a physical body. Also Try 1 John 4:15 to see if Muhammad qualifies.
@QuantumUni Like I said your book is corrupted with the addition of mans handiwork. John is the most evangelical of the Gospels becuase as the last Gospel written it had to support the new religion being preached. We can see the development of Christs deity through the Gospels in chronological order.
Have you ever heard of a gnostic prophet?
1John says "every SPIRIT/PROPHET that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God". Did the gnostics have a prophet?
@Saracen187, The corruption of the Bible poses theological threats to Islam, if the Bible is valid enough to prove Muhammad it's valid enough to disprove him. Attacking the Gospel and using the Gospel at the sametime is a sign of a failed inconsistent argument. When John says spirit it does not mean prophet, it's anyone who denies Jesus has came in the flesh and proclaims a truth of their own. Like I said Gnostics did not believe Christ had a physical body, John responded to that Heresy
@QuantumUni The Bible is valid to prove many things. The only things it is not valid for is Christian theology.
This is odd because the OT proves the theology of the Jews (albeit that the Jews have transgressed the laws and the corruption of the OT) and it also proves what the Quran teaches us. It doesn't however support the Christian doctrine that 3 are 1, that Jesus came for the world, that he dies on the cross, or that he was resurrected.
@QuantumUni 1John 4:1"believe not every spirit but prove the spirits, whether they are from God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world"
Here we see the comparison between spirit and prophet. We can sub the word spirit for prophet and understand this verse correctly.
Hence "every spirit that confesseth that Jesus is come in the flesh is of God". This is a test for those that would claim Prophethood in the from that time into the future.
@QuantumUni 1John4:15 says son of God. We are all Sons of God IF we believe in him and do as he has instructed us. You take this out of context. As you would being a Christian. You make big things out of little things and base you religion on it. As I said if Jesus said do not go to the Gentiles in 10 places and then is qouted as saying the opposite in one, I will go with the 10 quotes.
@Saracen187, We are not sons of God according to Sura 5:18. Muhammad believed this is blaspheme. He did not know what Christians meant when we said Jesus is the son of God, he also thought we meant God had sexual intercourse with Mary. So what you are stating is contradicting Islamic theology. I did not take 1 John 4:15 out of context! Jesus did not say 10 times not to go the gentiles that's another lie! Your not even consistent, when Jesus says go every creature you won't listen
@QuantumUni The Quran does not allow this analogy you are right. The reason is because people have twisted it to make Jesus the Son of God. However, the Jews used this term alot to mean a good, god fearing Jew.
1john5:1"He that believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God"
So we see that if we believe that Jesus is Christ we are given the same status as Jesus. We are the "begotten of God", hence the Sons of God. GET IT!!!
@QuantumUni Jesus categorically states many time that he is here for the Jews, go not to the Gentiles. He degrades the Gentiles to liken them with Dogs and Swine.
Did he give his life for Dogs and Swine when he wouldn't even preach to them?
This is not in keeping with your theology. Thats why you are in error.
@QuantumUni Biblical scholars accept the bible is partly mans work. The work of man will have been added to support their own claims. So if we KNOW that GENTILES have added to the bible, it would have been to include themselves in it and not the opposite.
@QuantumUni Jesus rebukes christians that "did many good deeds" in the name of Jesus. You said this refers to false prophets, now you say it is for Christians that did not keep the commandments. AGAIN that is my arguement you proving!!!LMFAO
The first commandment given by Jesus was "Say o'Israil, Our Lord Our God is ONE!!
Christians believe God is three. Because you don't keep this commandment he will "not know You".
@QuantumUni He's talking about the Christian. Those that have perverted his teachings, and those that have followed these teachings albeit innocently and with good intention. Only those that have follwed HIS TRUE teachings will he embrace and show favour.
@Saracen187, This passage also is referring to those who sin under grace, who profess his name but do not keep his commandments, Muhammad is liar who claims Jesus is not the son of God and that he never claimed it nor did he die on the cross which are two things Jesus claimed along with his disciples and his apostle Paul. This makes Muhammad one of those follower and also shows muslim inconsistency concerning truth.
@Saracen187, You don't know the difference between classical Greek and koine Greek. Koine(Κοινή) is the simple form of the scholary Greek (classical Greek). It means "common" and was the daily-average Greek for normal citizens and non educated types at that time period, you seem to be ashamed to admit you are in error. As far as the Greek inscriptions around Christ time I will PM the evidence.
'Saracen 187' I totally disagree with you. I know the Bible extremely well. You have taken scriptures out of context saying that, Jesus was only concerned with Jews...Jesus rejected all organised religion, he recognised the pain and suffering it had caused...he was an enlightened being, who happened to be from the tribe of Judah but what he practised was nearer to Buddhism.
@WillowChi If you believe ehat you've said then you obviously don't know the bible as well as you think!!!!! Jesus came to fulfill/observe the Law of Moses. How is this rejecting religion? He came only for Bani Israil. He means Jews. Only Jews.
If your a Buddhist then stick to Buddism. If your christian, go to another church!!!!
I have no idea why the Jews are so concerned about Jesus being a Palestinian...there are many Christian Palestinians. There are also Christian-Jews who recognise that Christ-consciousness is far more powerful than greed and suffering...the mood of the world is changing and one day, the Palestinians will live life in bliss.
Of course Jesus was a Palestinian! he was born and raised there. This is no different from other countries who later became known by different names. Ancient Egyptians called their land, Kemet. It was the Greeks who renamed it, Egypt...the same can be applied to Israel which was established as a state after WW2, until that time, it did not exist. The Jews who live there now are mostly white Europeans (Russian) Jews and are totally unrelated to the true Hebrews of the bible.
waaaouuuuwwwww, i'm really amazed
where do you get your information ??? !!!
mehdi1390 3 months ago
u believe in izlam u love satan
TheJasonking 8 months ago
Example from Quran 5:90 O YOU who have attained to faith! Intoxicants, and games of chance, and idolatrous practices, and the divining of the future are but a loathsome evil of Satan's doing:' shun it, then, so that you might attain to a happy state! 5:91 By means of intoxicants and games of chance Satan seeks only to sow enmity and hatred among you, and to turn you away from the remembrance of God and from prayer. Will you not, then, desist?
mehdi1390 3 months ago
@mehdi1390 yor muhamad CV
- killed over 900 mam, woman, kids, babies and old with his own hand and his sword
- had more than 9 wives
- took asiha from her mum and dad, then he killed him too, she was 6 yrs old and he was 53
- had not even 1 witness for his revelations
- traded thousands of slaves all his life
- he fought 33 battles and killed thousands with his army
- izlam belongs to satan
TheJasonking 3 months ago
@TheJasonking try this plz
youtubedotcom/watch?v=cR7Ea8T8sTQ or just type Muhammad legacy
mehdi1390 3 months ago
Back then thre were no religion when Yahshua walk the earth, reigion happen after his death and he was a Palestinian Jew. There were nowhite faces on that land at that time was hollywood want you all to believe because all that land according to GOD was AFRICA. People if that had was people of color of shades of brown light and dark. There was no blure eyes wih blonde hair man jesus. In franch they wroship a BLACK Jeus and a Black Mary and you cn find that on You Tube as well.
NubianQueenNEFERTITI 11 months ago
@NubianQueenNEFERTITI islam didn't exsist until 600 yrs ago! Jesus is 2,000 yrs old!
you4080 9 months ago
@you4080 where do you live to say "Islam didn't exist until 600 yrs ago! !" ?! in Cave Underground ?
krimlin85 6 months ago
@NubianQueenNEFERTITI Those with a pure heart see God, Jesus is God manifested in the flesh! Jesus is blue eyed, light to medium brown hair & in His presence is perfect peace! Jesus was not the statis quo of that day or any other time. I met The Lord face to face many times if you haven't it is because you do not have a pure heart!
you4080 9 months ago
Jesus is not a Muslim but Muslims do believe in Jesus(He is a prophet for all).
but i really do believe that calling Jesus "Palestinian" is more proper because the people of Bethlehem do call there selves Palestinians and refuse to be called Israelis.
time4blue 1 year ago
Im going to answer your other questions later because I don't want to throw all this stuff and your face to the point you have to respond with 5-6 comments' Oh and the reason I asked you if you are from California(Yes I am from California) is because "187" is a murder code in Los Angeles that Crips, Bloods and Mexican gangsters use in their slang.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
,why didn't israelites interpret it the islamic way
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni The Israelites did interpret it the Islamic way LMAO, Proof?
KJV John1:19-21"Jews sent priests and Levites to question him (JOHN), Who art thou? And he confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not.
ART THOU THAT PROPHET? And he answered No"
The Jews were waiting for three people 1.The Messiah 2:Elias/Elijah 3: THAT PROPHET.
This is muhammed. The prophet prophecised by Moses, and later by Jesus.
CAN YOU REFUTE THIS?????
Saracen187 1 year ago
NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, LATIN and GREEK." John 19:19-20
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni So what if the sign was written in 3 languages. Go to nearly any country in the world and you'll see signs in English. Are these all English speaking countries? No. Thats an absurd point.
You failed to answer me yet again. The sign of Jonah? How could the Church get it so wrong? Author of Acts or the word of Jesus? Which do you believe?
You won't answer because to do so would prove the problem with Christian doctrine.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni If you say Jesus you cannot hold to your arguement using Acts as your proof. If you say Author of Acts you contradict your God. Pretty bad position you've got yurslef into,lol.
Ok well lets go further. Many scholars now believe that all the authors of the Gospels borrowed from Mark. Mark himself borrowed from the Q Gospel/Book. Who wrote this Q? Where is this Q? Lol. Scholars have concocted the Q Gospel because of the errors and inconsistencies within the Gospels.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187. I don't have a clue about the point in your last to comments their just rants, attacks and subjective thought so.....Also I really need you ro try in refute Peter I'm waiting to see that, OH WAIT--------> "Well your Bible is corrupted anyway"!
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni It means that YOUR scholars have had to make up an imaginary book to act as a source for the first three Gospels. John is different to the other three in its time lines and stories, so this isn't even included in the Q theory.
Why would YOUR scholars need to do this? Does the word of God need imaginary books to put it into context?
Its a mess, just admit it. Stop beating around the bush and face the obvious.
Saracen187 1 year ago
Also Sacren I can easily refute Deut 18:18 with the context of Deut 18:16. The LORD is making a promise to send a series of prophets to speak in his name since the Israelites were afraid of God's presence so he will conuntinue to send a series of prophets and also gives the test to tell if one is false or not. Peter being a Jew also agrees with me and refutes you in Acts 3:22-25. Brethen is never used with context of another seed except israelites in the Bible also
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni No, the bretheren in this case is not a Jew and is definately not Jesus. Moses says "like unto me". So we have a bretheren of the Jews, who has much in common with Moses, that comes from a foolish and insignificant people so as to make the Jews jealous. I wonder who he's talking about?? lmao
Its the only clear prophecy you have and you don't get it. Keep performing mental gymnastics with the rest and disregard the obvious.
Trapped? I'm as free as a bird!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, All Jews and early Jewish Christians for 4 thousands year knew that Deut 18:18 is the context of a series of israelite prophets, I refuted you with Peter(him being a Jew) do I need the Talmud? Go look at Jewish theology. Muslims like to lie and twist the Bible to fit in their false arabian-gentile prophet.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni The Church has fashioned the Bible to try and get all prophecises to fit Jesus. This is why you have trouble with inconsistencies and contradictions. You did not refute me with Peter I'm still awaiting your response on my comment which means I have refuted you becuase you have no comeback.
You call Islam false yet your book calls it "of God". Now you go contrary to you Book as well as the word of Jesus lol.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, First all stop lying, I responded, I refuted you with Peter because he refuted you also and represented the Jewish theological interpretation of Deut 18:18 which in context is a series of israelite(brethen) prophets from Moses and on that God promised to send according to all that happened in Horeb(Deut 18:16 for context) don't lie. You seem to have no idea what "refuting" is. The Chruch did not fashion prophecies since Jesus quoted them himself! even your apologist know that!
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni I will now show why you and your Jewish/christian scholars are wrong on Deut 18:18. Deut 32:21 tells us God will move his people (JEWS) to jealousy by raising another nation. So the prophecy is not one for Israelites as it is about another nation. Brethren means brothers. Arabs and Jews speak almost the same language, are both semetic and originate from Abraham/Ibrahim. God says "from amongst their bretheren", this is a collective term. Bretheren of the JEWS are Arabs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Deut 17:15 destroys your view that brethen is referring to someone else other than israelites and if it is then it must be a series of ishmaelite prophets only and never a israelite. You distorted Deut 32:21, God starts speaking in verse 20 and verse 19 lets you know it's him speaking. Jews provoked God to jealously by thier idols and he wanted to return a just favor by those who are "NOT A NATION" and those of a "FOOLISH NATION" this cannot be the ishmaelites as you can see.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Do I also need to point out that you are back pedalling here??? You claimed it was all about Israelites, NOW you say it might be Ismaelites.
God says "From amongst their bretheren". Whose bretheren? The JEws. If he said your bretheren to moses you might assume he ment a Jew. But he said THEIR BRETHEREN. This are indeed the Arabs/Ismaelites.
I already said that the Bible contains Gods word but it is not all Gods word and thus has been corrupted. I can believe in what some of the...
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, You are distorting my position by mis-readings. My point in Deut is that the religious and historical interpretation of 18:18 which in context starting from verse 16 according to what happen in HOREB that God would continue to send prophets in his name. If "brethen" is the "ishmaelites" then israeli prophets should not exist! I wiped out any reference to a foreign nation and gave the contextual usage of "brethen" to mean israelites by quoting Deut 17:15 which uses the same phrase.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Ok, again I will REFUTE your cliam regarding Deut 18:18 along with 17:15.
We read in 18:18 that God refers to the Jews as a collective "their bretheren".So the prophet in question will come from outside the Jews but from a nation recognised as their brothers. God specifically refers to a PROPHET. this is a repeat of Gods word in 18:15 which states that the prophet will come from a nation other than the Jews but from their midst. The Jews are then told to "hearken unto him".
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, The meaning of Deut 18:18 your giving me is false, their is no mention of another nation but "among your brethren" which are the 12 tribes of Israel. Where in the world do you get the idea that this refers to a gentile nation/seperate nation? Their is no evidence in the text to support that. 17:15 refuted you because "among your brethen" like 18:18 is used to refer to "israelite" brethen among the tribes.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni It seems you are unable to read properly. 18:18 says their bretheren NOT your bretheren KJV Bible. This is God talking to Moses about the Jews. This means a nation OTHER THAN the Jews. 17:15 is talking about a different individual, A KING. It is a different subject to 18:18 and thus a different context.
SO you see my points are in context and YOUR are NOT.
I did'nt say MIDST ment outside of. The arabs lived AMONG the Jews. They were in their MIDST, or amidst the Jews.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, No this does not refer to a foreign nation and when I quoted "your brethen" I was talking about 18:15 NOT 18:18 nice distortion :), you don't know how to read contextual. When God speaks to Moses it's in private, Moses was a PROPHET. Moses spoke to the israelites on God's behalf from verse 18:15-16 and then from verse 17 to 22 he quotes what God told him directly in private according to what "you" desired in Horeb( verse 16) he would raise up a prophet from amond "their" brethen".
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni You are chopping and changing your view and now you are telling me what I was originally telling LMAO. Is this some kind of reverse psychology tactic, or a Jedi mind trick, ROFL.
You are reading OUT OF CONTEXT AGAIN!
17:15 talks of a king as they have in other nations.
18:18 is talking about a prophet.
THATS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE VERSES.
The King will be a JEW.
The prophet will be from another people, the bretheren of the Jews.
17:15 & 18:18 do not refer 2 the same person.
Saracen187 1 year ago
Comment removed
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Who are you to say what is an acceptable timeframe for the lineage of prophets? LMAO
EVERYONE knows the BIBLE is corrupt. The reasons I will not accept certain verses has nothing to do with my religion. As an atheist the arguements I make are still valid. I don't accept verses which contradict the teachings of Jesus. If Jesus says 10 times don't preach to Gentiles and then in 1 place he says do, then I go with the first 10. This is a logical approach. Christianity doesn't do logic!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, When Moses said those words their were no Arabs there, they were in a remote location near Sinai and the wilderness, just the 12 tribes. They did not mix with gentiles. Arabs did not live among the Jews.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Are Palestinians Arab? Yes. Are they the Philistines mentioned in the Bible? Yes. Where Jews scattered in the Nations? Yes. Were these Jews scattered amongst the arab nations? YES. Is 18:18 specific about a location? NO. Did it say Judea,Jerusalem?NO.
No one said the last prophet would come from Judea.
Did the philistines live amongst the Jews? Yes.
Did Greeks live amongst the Jews?Yes.
Romans?Yes.
Canaanites? Yes.
Samaritans? Yes.
So much for not living amongst Gentiles.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Palestine are not Philistines! Of course you would make this error!, it's like saying Iranians are Arabs! Palestine is a name given by the Romans to replace the name "Israel" or at best this is what they called that region. Philistines are descendants of Grecian sea-faring more related to Greeks and not Semite nor spoke Arabic. Most people make this false distinction because the two names sound similar. Philistines did not come in contact when Israelites during the days of Moses.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Of course modern day Palestinians are descendants of the Phillistines. The original philistines are a mixture of a coastal, meditteranean people and the canaanites. Some even think they may be egyptian. Again the origin is not known for certain but the philistines of old are the palestinians of new.
There was no Israel before the Balfour Declaration. When the Babylonians took modern day Israel split between the 12 tribes. Children of Israil refers to Isaac not a country!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, No they are not descendents! "Palestine" is a name from the Romans. Philistines are semitic at all. Israel was a nation since Joshua conquered it! Have you read the Tanakh, book of Joshua!? Joshua divided the land among the tribes not to long after Moses death! look at all your historical errors and you have the nerve to "LMAO" at me ahahaha
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Joshua called it Israel? Where's the verse?
Before he settled in the land as they crossed thru Jordan into Jericho "there came men in hither tonight of the Children of Israel" Jos2:2.
There was no land called Israel. It referred to the children of Isaac/Israel.
You really haven't got a clue. You claims are not supported by your Bible.
The Philistines landed in modern Israel and mixed with the indigenous people. They all bcame known as Philistines. The indigenous people were semetic!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Philistines for the last time are not Semitic! Give me some sources Your so ignorant! Also what ever you want to call the land it belonged to the Israelites!
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni 17:15 regarding the KING. This KING would rule over the Jews once they were a NATION. This means once they had settled in the promised Land. Moses governed them whilst they wandered the desert.
Likewise 18:18 is not concerned the time they spent wandering the wilderness. It is a promise of something that will happen in the future. As this was mentioned after 17:15 it is logical that this eventuality would happen after they had settled. When they settled they mixed with Gentiles&Arabs
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, You are way off my points, Im not concerned with the context of 18:18, 18:15 or 17:15 but the way " your brethen" is used to refer to israelites in both verses and not another race of people, these verses do not speak of an outer people. You are not giving a good exgesis. Peter disagree with you(knew Isa personally), Hebrews disagree with you, Christians do and I do. No one has interpreted these verses this way. 18:18 is a series of prophets ranging from Moses to John the Baptist.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni regarding 18:18, 18:15 and 17:15, which Bible are you quoting from?
KJV reads 17:15"One from among THY bretheren"
Catholic Bible reads"from among the number of your brothers."
Here God is talking to Moses. This is clearly talking about a JEW, a brother of MOSES.
18:18 KJV"from among their bretheren"
Catholic Bible"from the midst of their brothers"
God has told Moses he will raise one from the brothers of the Jews, "their bretheren"
THY bretheren & THEIR bretheren are NOT the same!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Remember Sacren187, Most Jewish scholars agree with my interpretation cocerning Deut 18:18 and the surrounding text so IM RIGHT! DON"T YOU REMEMBER IN THE PRIVATE MESSAGE!
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni If the Jews at the time of Jesus believe Deut as I did, give me your proof otherwise. I gave you the verse which clearly shows that the Jews were expecting another prophet as prophecised in the OT other than the Messiah and Elias/Elijah. Muhammed is "that Prophet" John1:19-21.
Who were they asking about?
Who is this prophet? What previous prophecy were they referring to?
You can't answer because your faith has taken all prophecies to mean Jesus, but we see the Jews thought otherwise
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, If Muhammad was "that prophet' or of the "prophet hood" spoken in Deut 18:18 they would have searched for an Arab not an Israeli. Also John the baptist completed the role of Elijah as well (MAtthew 11:13-15). Here let me act like you "OWNED"!!!!!!!!!
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Yes the Jews may have misinterpreted Duet 18:18 to mean an Israelite but Deut 32:21 clearly tells us that the prophet will come "from a foolish nation" to move the "Jews to jealousy".
this verse explains 18:18 for you.
John the Baptist said he was not Elijah but Jesus said he was. who is telling the truth? Another contradiction?
OWNED AGAIN!!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, I don't mean to bust in here, Yeshua taught that John the Baptist completed the role of Elijah, he did not teach that John was a reincarnation of Elijah, don't insert contradictions. Also the Quran teaches that "son of God" is a saying from the mouths of men and a gross lie, I don't think I need to quote the verses. So you cannot trust 1 John, plus it is not a relevant to Islamic theolgy since Muhammad said he was in the "gospel". So why are you behind this epistle?
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos Happy to discuss, no worries. your esponse doesn't answer the question is posted. Why did John say he was not elijah and Jesus says he was?
Jesus also claimed John was the most powerful of all prophets born of a womb. Was he more powerful than Jesus and Moses?
My comment is not a contradiction unless you can prove it is,lol.
My reference to 1John5:1 shows that JEWS would often use the term Son of God to mean a GOOD PERSON. Not that it ment the actual Son of God.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Thank you for responding, reincarnation is a eastern philosophy which of course is alien to Abrahamic theology( Judaism, Christianity, Islam). So we have to be careful they way we understand the language of Yeshua the Messiah. Luke talks about John the Baptist in more detail,Luke 1:17 states he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah. That's pretty much what Jesus meant. Also the real Elijah alongside Moses appeared to Yeshua in Luke 9:30.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos When Jesus was "resurrected", was he in his original form? Did he ever resume his original form?
Ok, so if Jesus ment that, how come John knew nothing about it? And what made John so great?
By stating "When we call Jesus "the" son of God this is to express his uniqueself." You are going against Christian doctrine or following a new one. John calls Jesus Gods only begotten son. Some bibles read "Unique" son becos schools have move from believing him the son of God.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, It's pretty much the same, Jesus was sinless and pre-existent, this is unique from the rest of us. Monogensis is translated as 'only' but in Hebrew thought it means unique, not "only" in a literal English sense, let me show you why, let's travel back in time to Abraham. Genesis 2:22, Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Isaac wasn't Abraham's "only" son literally, Ishmael was the first born.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos Well, i'm not sure what your saying in your first post bro. Either you believe Jesus is the Son of God or you don't. The "uniquesness" of Jesus is an apologetics arguement out of the Son of God scenario, as it was never claimed by Jesus himself in the manner in which Christians portray it. Unless of course you are a Unitarian Christian?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Yea I believe Jesus is "the" Son of God with the definite article, But I am also "a" son of God with the indenfinite article. The difference between me and Jesus is that he was the Messiah and sinless which is what makes him unique, I am just a normal person. Jesus taught that we can be sons of God too by doing the will of the Father(Matthew 5:44-45).
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos If Jesus was sinless then why when he was called Good did he chastise the person and say "there is none good but God"???
Indeed he was the Messiah and no doubt he was (as were all the prophets) amongst the foremost sons of God (of humanity).
Did Jesus not do the will of the Father also? Yes, hence he, like us (who follow Gods word), are sons of God.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, The man did not know Jesus but called him "good master", Yeshua did not want that man to go around everyday and say that to rabbis especially if he didn't know them. There is none good but God, the eternal light of Heaven and man if only good in relation to God not man of himself since he knows good through God. Yeshua did the will of the Father perfectly.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos sorry but your interpretation of the Good Master scenario is weak and only made to defend against my arguement. There is no way you can come to your conclusion from what is written in the verse.
Christians re-interpret plain English because it does not agree with their theology.
i'll pm you regarding your other query.
Peace out.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, I have to respecfully disagree, that is the only interpretation and I don't think it is weak since it is in harmony with the rest of the text. But if you have an interpretation other than this that doesn't contradict the sinless aspect of Yeshua please tell me. Also the reason I want to know the Quran is to see reality from the perception of a Muslim and see Islam as accurate as possible without presuppositions. I want to learn more of the Islamic position on Abrahamic theology.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos I don't see where in that verse you can qualify your comments. Please let me now.
what this verse proves is that Jesus clearly distinguishes himself from God both in person and righteousness, because no matter how good the person, no one is as good as God.
This one verse disproves the Trinity.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@LogosTheos Not sure about the last bit of your post.
Why is 1John not trustworthy? A strange statement from a Christian!
Muhammed said who was in the Gospel?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, So John is not Elijah in the literal sense, and regarding son of God some Jews understood it and some did not out of ignorance. And yes it can mean good person or servant. It expresses that a child behaves like his father and when we do the works of God we are called his children. The term expresses our close spiritual relationship to God, who is like a Father. When we call Jesus "the" son of God this is to express his unique self. Are you from California? ------->187?
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos No bro, i'm from Calif-ate,lol. I'm from England. Are you in Cali?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, I don't know what form Jesus had when he rose from the dead. But the gospels say when he appeared he was without scars and no holes in his hands from the nails. Also John saw his heavenly form in a vision --> Revelation 1:13-16. I don't know, does the Quran teach about Elijah going to heaven on a chariot? How did Elijah go to Heaven in a physical form? These things are a mystery.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos We are told in the Bible that Jesus returned to the disciples as a different person. They could not recognise him but came to understand that he was Jesus.
So, ressurection is when the same person dies and comes back to life in the same physical self. Reincarnation is the return of a dead person in a different body.
Which of these is applicable to the return of Christ?
Was he reincarnated or resurrected?
How does this fit in with Abrahamic theology?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Reincarnation is actually the return of a person in another physical life, a second life span where that person once again is born from the womb of a woman a clone image of his or her previous life, this is according to eastern msytic philosophy. Yeshua/Jesus was resurrected, according to Abrahamic theology God can raise the dead since he is infinite and does as he pleases. Elijah raised someone from the dead before in 1 Kings, I forgot the verse although, you can check.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos ok, so if Jesus died and came back but doesn't look like the Jesus that died, is this resurrection or reincarnation?
Jesus resurrected people by the will of God. These people all looked the same as they did when they died. This is resurrection.
This is not what happened to Jesus according to the Bible. It is closer to reincarnation than resurrection.
Reincarnation has more in common with the pagan roman beliefs than resurrection.
So which is it?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Hi friend, sry for the lag in response. Reincarnation takes two-life spans. When you are born from the womb as a baby and die as a man and then for an unknown period of time you're born again as a baby and then die as a man again this would be called reincarnation, 2 full life cycles. Yeshua wasn't born twice and he didn't appear as a baby twice in different time-lines. Yeshua was resurrected from his 'one' life to eternity with the Father, this is resurrection.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos But he was brought back looking like someone else according to the Bible. He died and was brought back to life. Resurrection is as the same person (physically and spiritually), reincarnation is the same soul but different body.
I could say that he went into the womb of the earth and was re-born.
We might agree that the pagan beliefs of reincarnation were too pagan so the authors of the resurrection chose to blur the lines.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, ((This is off subject sorry)) Do you know where can look up the most literal translation of the Quran online? I asked some fellow named Yahya Snow (he's some Muslim blogger) and he told me Hilali/Khan translation and im trying to look for a sight that has scholar exegesis on the side but can't find one your help will be appreciated!
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@QuantumUni I will look at the links you ent and pm you back on those but regarding this debate. Your losing it friend. I admire the way you defend your faith but this obstinance will only lead you astray.
If you are so short-sided to quote Matt 7:21-23 as referring to Muhammed then you are way off course.
1John3-4 any prophet that claims Jesus is the Christ is of GOD. Islam does this and still you reject it by holding to the corrupt verses of man.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni from beginning to end we are told of another prophet that will come to the people. Moses tells you in 18:18. We are told how to recognise a true prophet in the verse above. And then Jesus talks about a Comforter/Holy spirit(prophet) that will lead men into all truth. Meaning a prophet witha revelation for all men covering all aspects of life. This is Islam.
Your book prophecises about him but you will not heed. Jesus said he came for the Jews and the comforter come for all men.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187 Islam will bring you closer to Jesus than you are now. You won't have to believe that Jesus died for the wicked. That God sacrificed himself to himself in a manner that he had previously cursed and forbidden. did God then commit suicide? Isn't suicide abhorred by the church. Those that commit suicide can not enter heaven.
It is a story that doesn't make sense. And as such can only be the imaginings of man as God is all perfect and would not reveal confusion and contradiction to us.
Saracen187 1 year ago 2
@Saracen187 Assalam walekum ..Totally agree with you bro! former christian reverted to Islam..
searching4datruth 1 year ago
@searching4datruth aleikum salaam brother. Peace and blessings to you :)
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, , You know what your crazy, I TOLD YOU 3 TIMES 17:15 AND 18:15 USES THE SAME CONTEXT AND PHRASE AS 18:18 "AMONG YOUR BRETHEN OR YOUR BRETHEN" TO DESCRIBE ISRAELITES! 18:18 DOES NOT refer to a seperate nation, you have not proved that so you do not qualify for that statement unless you fully refute my objections all the way through showing why this is not a seperate nation. What are you reading in the text? Why didn't israelites the islamic way for 4000 years? Even Muhammad didn't
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Once again you've been totally owned. All my evidence comes from your Bible. You deliberately distort the scripture to fit your nonsensical ideas. You even misquote and fabricate verses.
Your sources are rubbish and your responses not far off childish rantings.
Either conceed your error or withhold your comments. This is getting rather boring now, lmao
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187 , The gospel of John does not mention Muhammad, Muhammad did not come when the disciples were alive, he cannot abide forever and he cannot live in people, these are qualites of a spirit, the Holy Spirit(not Gabriel we don't believe that) not a man and this prophecy has already been fulfilled in Acts. Muhammad is not in the Bible because he is a liar.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Where does it say that the Holy Spirit will come in the time of the disciples?
1John describes a prophet as a spirit. The holy spirit means holy prophet. Muhammed is the ONLY prophet to hold the title Holy Prophet, as Jesus is the only Christ. Of course all the prophets are holy just as all prophets are Messiahs, yet they each have a title unique to them. I suppose this is just a coincidence?
Muhammed is very much in the Bible you just deny him as the Jews denied Christ.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, John 14:25, 26: "All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Comforter, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name, will teach YOU all things and will remind you of everything I have said to YOU." He sent the holy spirit to the disciples.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni "But the Comforter/perycletos/praised one/Muhammed, the holy spirit/holy prophet/Muhammed, whom the Father will send in my name (Jesus is mentioned more than Muhammed in the Quran), will teach you all things (religion,social, economic,equality etc rules for all aspects of life=Quran) and remind you of everything I have said to you(see above)."
Quantumpuny, you are a joke. As is your faith. You have not proved anything to me other than how brainwashed you.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Muhammad is not the comforter and never will be, he cannot dwell in people, he cannot abide forever, and he did not come while the disciples were alive. In John 1:19 and on the Jews whent to an ISRAELITE not an ARAB. They were wrong about Christ and the prophet being two different individuals. Here the proof THE PROPHET( John 6:14-15) and THE MESSIAH (John 1:41 and John 1:45) Muhammad was neither.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Did Jesus say the comforter would dwell in people? If it was the HOLY SPIRIT as you define it, it was already with Jesus. Jesus had already given it to the disciples when he sent them out to heal the sick.
Jesus said "if i do not go HE will not come".
If the spirit was already with Jesus and the disciples, why did Jesus have to go?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Owned again. You fail everytime.
Just cos you say your right, doesn;t make you right and just bcos some scholars think he spoke Greek doesn't mean he did, especially if MOST scholars agree with me and think he didn't.
Its ridiculous that you would send me that link. You obviously didn't read it properly before you decided to cut and paste,LMAO!!!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Deut 17:15 is not talking of a prophet but a KING, to rule over the Jews as the KINGS that exist in other in other nations. This line means that it is not the Messiah or a prophet as these are not in existence in other nations. This is Moses talking to the Jews. Moses is saying he will choose a king from amongst them who is not a stranger (he must be a Jew).
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, My point of 17:15 was not the verse itself but the contextual usage of "among your brethren" to refer to israelites. You have not given a great contextual argument especially with "midst" when the literal translation is קֶ֫רֶב(Kehreb) literally according to strongs #7129-- the inward part, within or a body of such, it does not mean outside or surrounding not even in ENGLISH. Your confusing it with AMIDST so this doesn't prove your point at all.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni So the mentioned bretheren will be living/existing amidst/amongst the Jews. This is WITHOUT DOUBT a prophecy concerning the Ismaelites/Arabs. The subsequent description of this prophet fits Muhammed like a glove.
The King/Ruler chosen by Moses was Judah if memory serves. He was a jew from amongst the children of Israel i.e not a stranger.
The Jews are also commanded to follow this Prophet from their bretheren. Whomever does not, Deut 18:19 "I will require it of him."
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni This is God warning the Jews they had best listen to this prophet even though is not one of them.
Your weak excuse that if "bretheren" means Ishmaelite then there should be no Israili prophets is ridiculous. The Bible doesn't say ALL prophets will be arabs. It only says it for this one mentioned in Deut 18:18.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, You keep getting confused. It's either a series of ishmaelite prophets or israeli prophets, it can't be both.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni I am not confused, its your bad English. Muslims agree that all the prophets were hebrew so this is in keeping with my point. The only prophet who was not a hebrew was Muhammed, yet they were ALL SEMETIC.
Again you misquote me. I said Koine Greek was COMMON GREEK and the BIBLE was not written in COMMON Greek. Were the disciples scholars of Greek? NO.
I asked for your source regarding the Jewish tombs and being written in Greek as opposed to Jewish, LOL. U must have forgotten!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, One of the biggest problems is you forgetting the context starting from verse 16, they desired men to speak on God's behalf since they were afraid of his great glory and presence, God said "what you have spoken is good" so he would "raise up a prophet" from among your brethen according to what you desired in Horeb, Not 3000 years later after they are dead. This passage was the beginning of the seal of prophets that he would countinue to send on his behalf, prophets for generations.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
Comment removed
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Bible says if it is in accordance with the teachings of Muhammed as we are told that the teachings of Jesus Moses and previous prophets are revelations of God. Just because John contains some truth doesn't mean its all good.
Aramaic was spoken amongst the semetic people, i never claimed it was a global language. Irrelevant statement you make. If Pontius ruled this part of the world it is logical he may well have learned the language.
Koine Greek means Common Greek, this is .....
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, I did not give an irrelavant statement, you wondered if Pontius Pilate could speak Aramaic, I eliminated that by showing it was not a common used language especially with gentiles and other provinces, the biggest proof is that it's dead, so how is that irrelavant to the subject matter? A Roman appointed judge is highly doubhtful to speak this langauge coming from and raised in the gentiles parts of the Roman Empire especially with a translator not present.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni I didn't say the Bible was written in Koine Greek, you did. I said it isn't written in Koine Greek so if that was the greek used by the disciples then they couldn't have written the Gospels as the Greek used therein is much more sophisticated.
Aramac was predominantly spoken by Jews, correct, but that doesn;'t mean Pontius couldn't have learned it. History states that Romans spoke Latin not Greek. Does that mean Jesus also knew Latin? You have no evidence you have your assumptions.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, What manuscript proof do you have? You don't even know Biblical Greek nor it's history and evolution. Koine Greek was actually the less sophisticated form of classical Greek, you just made a great error by saying it's the more complex version, check your information please. The originals were written in all capitals with no accents,breathing marks or spaces. I don't make assumptions I provide evidence, Your lying because you say history states that Roman spoke Latin only and not....
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni ACTs and Isiaiah, Acts and Isiaiah. You quote from anonymous scripture and unsubstantiated prophecy. I quote to you the words of Jesus, your Lord, your God and you don't accept his words. If you don't even believe what your Lord and Saviour has commanded, what chance have you got?
You trap yourself with your foolish statements and irrational conclusions.
Open your eyes, your mind and your heart. If you reject even the words of your own prophet you are beyond lost!!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Your personal attacks and subjection is a sign weakness so drop it, I quoted the words of Jesus and Messianic prophecies but you apply and force Islamic theology in the scriptures and twist his words! Do you know that Jesus quoted the prophet Isaiah all the time? because Jesus was the fullfillment of messianic prophecy and wants the WHOLE WORLD to be saved? Their are no clearer words then that from my Lord and Savior who desires ALL man to be saved Jew and Gentile!
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni You have not wuoted Jesus only Isaiah and Acts. NOT Jesus. This is not about his Messianic status so why mention Jesus quoted from Isaiah? Are you changing the arguement again? If it is so clear then where is your irrefutable proof? You have none because i have quoted from the Bible to refute your claims.
Why did he not want to preach to or heal the Samaritans or the Canaanites? If he wouldn't do it himself, why do you think he would send others?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, So I guess I have to quote Jesus instead of Isaiah the prophet eh? But what about Jesus quoting Isaiah and the prophets demonstrating the prophecies being fullfilled in him and of his mission? Matthew 13:14, Matthew 22:44, Matthew 26:13, Luke 4:18, Luke 7:27, John 6:45 and on. Muhammad never quoted a "single" prophet! And I find it funny how you talk about "lost injill" But Deedat, Zakir and Shabir although always force Muhammad in the present gospels specifically "Gospel of John".
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni The Quran refers to many of the Bibles prophets and even has a chapter dedicated to the "worthiest of all women", Mary. This honour is not afforded her in the Church as she is female and we know how St Paul feels about women don't we!!!! She is hardly even mentioned in the Bible.
We muslims believe that the Bible still retains some truth, there is no arguement there. The Bible has been corrupted but its not total fabrication.
Saracen187 1 year ago
get educated idiot, "muslim" means "one who submits (to God)" so if a muslim says jesus and abraham and whatnot was a muslim, they are basically right since they all submited to God.
argonium79 1 year ago
Notice how you didn't respond to acts but gave me ignorance, instead of actually trying to debunk my proofs you say "Oh well the Bible is written by an unknown author" which I have refuted and refuted with proofs and you refuse to believe it simple because Luke "didn't write his signature".To show your inconsistent arguments keep and mind we don't even know the 'names' of the individuals who complied the Quran. Their are in existence more data for who wrote the Bible than for the Quran.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni There is NO data for the names of all those who wrote the Bible, lmao. Where's your proof?? You still have to answer my question about Acts 8:25 and the contradicting order given by Jesus. Who is right and who is wrong? Lol, keep side stepping. You failed to address the Sign of Jonah prophecy. lmao, couldn't get out of that one so you disregarded it.
Your arguements are weak and your attempts at refuting me are laughable.
You make a mockery of yourself and your religion.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, I'm not going to tell you again Acts 8:25 THROUGH 35! refutes your objection of Jesus not wanting the disciples to preach to gentiles, he command Philip(original disciple) in verse 29 and quotes Isaiah 53 preaching Jesus death and resurrection to the Ethopian gentiles who embraced Jewish beliefs.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Hahahaha, you couldn't trap you foot in the door my friend never mind a muslim. I asked you a question. If Acts8:25 says Philip preached to Samaritans and Jesus told his disciples explicitly not to go unto the Samaritans. WHO DO YOU BELIEVE? WHO IS WRONG?The fact you are quoting greek words should give you an idea as to the origin of your book!!!If you think you can prove that the Gospels were written by the disciples you're better than your scholars,lol, and we both know your not!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, The disciples knew Greek! Greek was a common language and Judea for travel, trade and communication with Romans and within the Roman Empire! it was a multilingual society, Jews interacted with Greeks all the time!. Their is already Biblical, historical and archaeological evidence for that! Biblical proof( John 12:20-21,John 19:19-20, Acts 9:29, and more) Most Jewish funeral tob inscriptions from 300 B.C. to 500 A.D. were in GREEK 70% of them while 12% Latin and 18% Hebrew/Aramaic!
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni How is it then that historians tell us Jesus spoke Aramaic? If Greek was so prevalent in Jewish society, why did Jesus not speak it? I agree Greek was spoken widely, but amongst the merchants and traders and higher echalons of society. The poor had no need for it. Give me your source for your Jewish tomb statistics, lmao!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187 , Jesus spoke Greek here the proof, No translator when speaking to Roman governer of Judea Pontius Pilate(Mark 15:2-5; Matthew 27:11-14; Luke 23:3; John 18:33- 38) No Translator when he spoke to Roman centurion(Matt.8:5-13). Jesus spoke to Greek woman (Mark 7:26). Greek was a language that united all cultures of the Roman Empire similar to U.S. or in the U.K whereas the english language united all the culture. It's for neutral communication apart from everyone's own ethnic language.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni According to the Bible Jesus and Pontius were alone in the room. Who else was there to record the conversation? How do we know the Roman didn't speak Aramaic as well? The Greek woman was living in Jerusalem, how do we know she didn't speak Aramaic?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, LOL! Aramaic is a dead language now and by that you know it wasn't widely spoken. Pontius Pilate is not from Judea so logically he would not speak Aramaic but Latin or Greek as most Romans who are gentiles would. And Yes it was possible for the woman to speak greek.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni everyday greek. It is not the Greek of scholars, writer, orators or emperors. This is why your theory that the disciples wrote the Gospels is wrong. The Gospels were not written in common Greek.
The Greek woman lived in Jerusalem and propbably spoke Aramaic well.
There is nowhere in the Bible that suggests Jesus spoke Greek. You made that up to prove a point. Stick to facts please!!!!
I know the man Phillip spoke to in Acts 8:26-39 is ethiopian. I referred you to Acts 8:25......
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, The NT was written in koine greek, you just gave me a statement not followed by evidence. You just said that their is no where in the Bible that "suggest" Jesus spoke greek??? But I just!........ I just gave you the evidence with Pontius Pilate and the Greek woman that "suggest" so! plus historical evidence like the Greek LXX translation used by hellenistic Jews in Jerusalem before Jesus time and physical greek incriptions on tombs 70% and other data that shows Greek spoken.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni We can assume that when Jesus spoke with Pontius there was someone else there as it is written in the third person. If you say no, then how do we know what happened? Some Gospels say Jesus did not say a word, another said he responded to Pontius' remarks, contradiction???lol
LXX, written by greek speaking Jews or just greeks? Jeruslaem or Rome or Constantinople?
I asked for you source concerning the Jewish tombs and their greek inscriptions. Where is it? lol
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187...........and not Greek what are your sources? And you accuse me of assumptions? What are your sources that comfirm that Latin was not spoken along with Greek by Romans? Passion of the Christ LOL!
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni So in summary, you failed to prove Jesus came for all mankind.
You have avoided commenting on the Sign of Jonah. No comment on the Q Gospel.
I refuted you about Deut 18:18.
You couldn't answer why Jesus did not preaach to the Samaritans even though they are Jews also.
I'd say I've pretty much run rings round you!!!!!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, They were not Samaritans in Acts they were Ethiopians man, the ones Philip spoke to, Acts is after the events of the gospels!. Jesus came for all man first the jew and then the gentiles because it is said ALL nations will be blessed through Abraham! which carried through isaac and last Jesus! Your summary is childish and a waist of keyboard life.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Don#t change what I said, thats dishonest of you!!!! Acts 8:25 states that the disciples preached to the SAMARITANS. This is contrary to the commands of JESUS MATT10:5 ""Don't go to the Gentiles or the Samaritans" NLT.
So Acts is preaching contrary to the orders of Christ. Jesus never helped Samaritans (or Gentiles) and he didn't want his disciples to either. This destroys the theology of Jesus for the World.
Your religion is not supported by your prophet. You lose all day every day
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, You're contradicting your own points and refuting yourself for me. Yes in Acts8:25 Peter is preaching to the gentiles as commanded by Jesus (Mattthew 24:14). Jesus was sent to the house of israel first and to the gentiles. Acts 8:25 shows that your interpretation of Matthew 10:5 is false and not in harmonization with the gospels.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni My point about Acts is this. If the author of acts is reciting a tale about disciples preaching to Gentiles, it is in direct contradiction of the commandment of Jesus Matt 10:5. There is no way to mis-interpret Matt 10:5"Jesus sent out the twelve apostles with these instructions: "Don't go to the Gentiles or the Samaritans, 10:6 "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel"
How can ANYONE mis-interpret this???
The Samaritans are JEWS. Why did Jesus not preach to them also?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, It is not in contradiction at all, ALL which in Greek is πᾶς(pas) which is literally EVERYTHING. After his death he commanded them to go to the gentiles. Jesus was sent to the house of israel first and the time had not come for the message to be spread to the gentiles until after he completed his mission on the cross and saved israel and then israel would bless all nations as promised by God through Abraham which is in Jesus Christ by sending his disciples into the world.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Jesus NEVER once says GO TO THE GENTILES. He says go in to the nations. This was to preach to the scattered jews IN THE NATIONS! I have given you proof of this from your BIBLE.
Jesus never said I have come for the JEws and then the WORLD.
Matthew 15:24 Jesus answered and said, ‘I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel’. ONLY THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL!!!
Jesus did not fulfill his mission. He was sent to Bani Israel and they did not accept him.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, He never said go to the gentiles? Acts 9:15, Matthew 24:14. He did, once again your trying to implement false islamic theology into the Bible, no one interprets these scriptures this way only muslims. Not Christians are any theologians before and after the time of Muhammad. Your false interpretation is a contradiction and you cannot reconcile with other verses where Jesus says PREACH TO ALL CREATURES so your poor excuse is "oh well it's corrupted".
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni The OT does not allow human sacrifice. Any one hung to die is cursed. You attribute these things to Jesus? Thats blasphemy!!!
Matt 12:7 "God desires mercy, not sacrifice."Matt 9:13 I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Sacrifice is not part of his message either!! Read the Book without your Pauline preconceptions and you will see that Jesus had nothing to do with what you've been taught.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, False context and twisted meanings, doesn't it say in both the OT and Quran that Abraham offered his son to be sacrificed? Jesus was cursed for our transgressions as prophecised by the Prophet Isaiah in ch 53 and Psalms 22. Jesus sacrificed his life for us not to demons as the pagans did you interpretation is false as usual. Sacrificing not part of the message? Jesus said their is no greater love for a man to lay down his life for his friends! We sacrifice for God daily you point?
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni It does say that Abraham offered his son but God did not allow Abraham to sacrifice his son. I REFUTE you YET AGAIN. This is not proving your point.
So God was cursed? Jesus is God right? God was cursed? Interesting theory,LMFAO!
Laying down a life for a friend does not constitute sacrifice. Where did you learn English?
You claim Jesus sacrificed himself for you, but who did he sacrifice himself to? ANSWER PLEASE!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Sacrifice is to give up something of yours or something else for the benefit of another for good, neutral or evil reasons. This is the literal meaning, it is not restricted and is varied, such examples: love sacrifice, animal sacrifice, sacrificing amount, list goes on. I'm not suprised you made this mistake since you did the same thing with "midst" and "amidst".
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni I know what sacrifice means, but you said "Jesus said their is no greater love for a man to lay down his life for his friends!" to justify his human sacrifice for the sins of man. So your general defininiton of sacrifice is not relevant here. I told you that this verse means a different sort of sacrifice, not a HUMAN one.
You are proving my point AGAIN!!! LMAO
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, I never prove you points but I destroy and all you respond with is jokes. I'm glad I gave you the English lesson concerning "sacrifice".
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni the pm@s you sent were weak and stated that most scholars didn't believe Jesus spoke Greek. Yet becos SOME scholars think he did you believe this proves your point.
Thats laughable!!!!
You are an illiterate, lol. I taught you the meaning of sacrifice. you are another christian liar that has no fear of their Lord because just like the Church you lie. Bare faced and unabashed.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Now when Jesus says "Many will say unto me on that day "Lord,Lord have we not prophecised in your name? and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?" And I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." Matt 7:21-23
who does Jesus mean? The Jews? No. The Muslim? No. The Hindu? No
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Matthew 7:21-23 is referring to false followers like Muhammad who is a great example of this passage, putting lies in the mouth of my Lord Isa whom he never met nor spoke his language.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni MAtt 7:21-23 referring to Muhammed. YOU MUST BE ON SOME STRONG HALLUCINAGENICS< ROFL< LMFAO.
Did Muhammed do things in the name of Jesus? Did he call Jesus LORD?
He's talking to you, you simpleton.
This verse is for CHRISTIANS/CATHOLICS. Muslims don't call Jesus Lord and neither do Jews.
Your Holy Wars, Inquistions, killing of innocent natives around the world etc.
All in the name of Christ and the Church.
Jesus is prophecising about YOU!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, Now you want to talk about the crusades? My point was on spot Muhammad does not believe Jesus is Lord/Kurios so he is false. Jesus did not rebuke them because they called him Lord but the fact that they did not keep his Father's commandments ---> 1 John 3:23, Muhammad failed and therfore he is false.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni YOU are MISREADING 1John 1-4 and inserting your own words. This is BLASPHEMY!! If this is so easy for you to do just arguing with me, imagine how much easier for the Church who have a vested interest in propogating lies!!
1John1-4 states that a prophet which claims "JESUS is the CHRIST is of God".
It does not state Jesus is Lord or God. This is a gross misrepresentation on your part.
Therefore Muhammed stated the truth which means he is of God.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, I did not quote 1 John 1-4, I quoted 1 John 3:23, Muhammad does not believe Jesus is the son of God. 1 John as a whole refutes Muhammad. And speaking of misquoting first 1 John 1-4 says nothing like that, That's 1 John 4 and it states he who believes "Christ has come in the Flesh is of God", This was a reponse to the gnostic heresy who believe Jesus did not have a physical body. Also Try 1 John 4:15 to see if Muhammad qualifies.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Like I said your book is corrupted with the addition of mans handiwork. John is the most evangelical of the Gospels becuase as the last Gospel written it had to support the new religion being preached. We can see the development of Christs deity through the Gospels in chronological order.
Have you ever heard of a gnostic prophet?
1John says "every SPIRIT/PROPHET that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God". Did the gnostics have a prophet?
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, The corruption of the Bible poses theological threats to Islam, if the Bible is valid enough to prove Muhammad it's valid enough to disprove him. Attacking the Gospel and using the Gospel at the sametime is a sign of a failed inconsistent argument. When John says spirit it does not mean prophet, it's anyone who denies Jesus has came in the flesh and proclaims a truth of their own. Like I said Gnostics did not believe Christ had a physical body, John responded to that Heresy
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni The Bible is valid to prove many things. The only things it is not valid for is Christian theology.
This is odd because the OT proves the theology of the Jews (albeit that the Jews have transgressed the laws and the corruption of the OT) and it also proves what the Quran teaches us. It doesn't however support the Christian doctrine that 3 are 1, that Jesus came for the world, that he dies on the cross, or that he was resurrected.
these are assumptions based on flimsy evidence.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni 1John 4:1"believe not every spirit but prove the spirits, whether they are from God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world"
Here we see the comparison between spirit and prophet. We can sub the word spirit for prophet and understand this verse correctly.
Hence "every spirit that confesseth that Jesus is come in the flesh is of God". This is a test for those that would claim Prophethood in the from that time into the future.
How can you misinterpret this??
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni 1John4:15 says son of God. We are all Sons of God IF we believe in him and do as he has instructed us. You take this out of context. As you would being a Christian. You make big things out of little things and base you religion on it. As I said if Jesus said do not go to the Gentiles in 10 places and then is qouted as saying the opposite in one, I will go with the 10 quotes.
Christians will take one verse and cling to it.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, We are not sons of God according to Sura 5:18. Muhammad believed this is blaspheme. He did not know what Christians meant when we said Jesus is the son of God, he also thought we meant God had sexual intercourse with Mary. So what you are stating is contradicting Islamic theology. I did not take 1 John 4:15 out of context! Jesus did not say 10 times not to go the gentiles that's another lie! Your not even consistent, when Jesus says go every creature you won't listen
QuantumUni 1 year ago
@QuantumUni The Quran does not allow this analogy you are right. The reason is because people have twisted it to make Jesus the Son of God. However, the Jews used this term alot to mean a good, god fearing Jew.
1john5:1"He that believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God"
So we see that if we believe that Jesus is Christ we are given the same status as Jesus. We are the "begotten of God", hence the Sons of God. GET IT!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Jesus categorically states many time that he is here for the Jews, go not to the Gentiles. He degrades the Gentiles to liken them with Dogs and Swine.
Did he give his life for Dogs and Swine when he wouldn't even preach to them?
This is not in keeping with your theology. Thats why you are in error.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Your arguement brings your Book into question, because either he DID come for the Gentiles or he DIDN'T.
Your BOOK has it both ways.
Majority of Jesus' quotes state that he didn't. Paul may write that he did but we're not interested in that.
So if Jesus said I have not come for the Gentiles and then says I have come for every creature in one verse ONCE, we should go with that should we?
thats LAUGHABLE!!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Biblical scholars accept the bible is partly mans work. The work of man will have been added to support their own claims. So if we KNOW that GENTILES have added to the bible, it would have been to include themselves in it and not the opposite.
This is logic!! Commonsense!!!
BUDDY you got owned again!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni Jesus rebukes christians that "did many good deeds" in the name of Jesus. You said this refers to false prophets, now you say it is for Christians that did not keep the commandments. AGAIN that is my arguement you proving!!!LMFAO
The first commandment given by Jesus was "Say o'Israil, Our Lord Our God is ONE!!
Christians believe God is three. Because you don't keep this commandment he will "not know You".
Saracen187 1 year ago
@QuantumUni He's talking about the Christian. Those that have perverted his teachings, and those that have followed these teachings albeit innocently and with good intention. Only those that have follwed HIS TRUE teachings will he embrace and show favour.
WHY DID JESUS MAKE THIS PROPHECY?
Your brainwashed friend. This is a wake up call.
Saracen187 1 year ago
@Saracen187, This passage also is referring to those who sin under grace, who profess his name but do not keep his commandments, Muhammad is liar who claims Jesus is not the son of God and that he never claimed it nor did he die on the cross which are two things Jesus claimed along with his disciples and his apostle Paul. This makes Muhammad one of those follower and also shows muslim inconsistency concerning truth.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Saracen187, You don't know the difference between classical Greek and koine Greek. Koine(Κοινή) is the simple form of the scholary Greek (classical Greek). It means "common" and was the daily-average Greek for normal citizens and non educated types at that time period, you seem to be ashamed to admit you are in error. As far as the Greek inscriptions around Christ time I will PM the evidence.
QuantumUni 1 year ago
'Saracen 187' I totally disagree with you. I know the Bible extremely well. You have taken scriptures out of context saying that, Jesus was only concerned with Jews...Jesus rejected all organised religion, he recognised the pain and suffering it had caused...he was an enlightened being, who happened to be from the tribe of Judah but what he practised was nearer to Buddhism.
WillowChi 1 year ago
@WillowChi If you believe ehat you've said then you obviously don't know the bible as well as you think!!!!! Jesus came to fulfill/observe the Law of Moses. How is this rejecting religion? He came only for Bani Israil. He means Jews. Only Jews.
If your a Buddhist then stick to Buddism. If your christian, go to another church!!!!
Saracen187 1 year ago
I have no idea why the Jews are so concerned about Jesus being a Palestinian...there are many Christian Palestinians. There are also Christian-Jews who recognise that Christ-consciousness is far more powerful than greed and suffering...the mood of the world is changing and one day, the Palestinians will live life in bliss.
WillowChi 1 year ago
Of course Jesus was a Palestinian! he was born and raised there. This is no different from other countries who later became known by different names. Ancient Egyptians called their land, Kemet. It was the Greeks who renamed it, Egypt...the same can be applied to Israel which was established as a state after WW2, until that time, it did not exist. The Jews who live there now are mostly white Europeans (Russian) Jews and are totally unrelated to the true Hebrews of the bible.
WillowChi 1 year ago