Worshipping Jesus!!!
Zaher Kanafani
The main difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christians
claim that Jesus is God. This is fully rejected in Islam.
Suzanne Fortin answered to a message:
>>A main point to emphasize, if Jesus was the Lord, he would ask his
>> disciples to worship Him, to kneel and to prostrate in front of him. Did
>> that happen?
>It is *not* recorded that Jesus asked this. But Jesus say "Before you were
>I AM" and claimed to be God. He also claimed that he could forgive sins
>when only God can do that.
>He also instituted the Eucharist. He said "Unless you eat my flesh and
>drink my blood, you shall not have eternal life". He meant this literally,
>and at the last supper instituted the sacrament. He lifted the bread and
>said "take this all of you and eat it: this is my body". Now who else
>could claim to do that but someone who thought he was God? If his
>apostles and disciples hadn't thought he was God, they would have never
>accepted these claims.
How can you say that Jesus claimed to be God, then you said he did not
asked his disciples to kneel and to prostrate in front of him.To whom
people will kneel and prostrate then? To idols or pictures? Like today. I
asked many christians specially scientists: do you really believe that
Jesus is God? Some only answered yes, many answered no, and some others
told me that they became atheist because this doctrine is not rational. I
am not liing. Ask people and you will see this is true. If christians say
Jesus is a prophet, believe me muslims and christians world will be
unified, they will LOVE themselves, worship God, believe in all prophets
among them Jesus and Mohammed (peace be upon them). Beleive me also that
like that God will love you, and Jesus will love you.
Regards to all
Zaher Kanafani
I will follow any comments
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
GoffsCA
>From: Zaher Kanafani <zk...@aub.edu.lb>
>Date: Tue, Dec 16, 1997 11:02 EST
>The main difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christians
>claim that Jesus is God. This is fully rejected in Islam.
True. Christianity looks at the totality of Biblical revelation, and finds
that Jesus is called God, is referred to in terms that can only apply to God,
and is worshipped as God. Therefore either a) Jesus is God, or b) the entire
Bible is a blasphemy.
>How can you say that Jesus claimed to be God, then you said he did not
>asked his disciples to kneel and to prostrate in front of him.To whom
>people will kneel and prostrate then?
Worship is not the physical postures one places himself in. I could kneel to
someone or something, or prostrate myself, and in my heart be secretly mocking
and denying that thing or person. Worship - *true* worship - takes place in
the heart. One need not assume X physical posture to worship. Indeed, there
are people who are physically incapable of kneeling or prostration - would you
claim that they are on that account incapable of worshipping? Of course not.
But their worship would be apart from physical posture, as it is with *all*
people. Thus, demanding a specific instance of someone adopting a specific
posture in Jesus' presence is to demand that which is utterly irrelevant. You
would do better to examine, as I mentioned above, the *totality* of the Bible,
and notice that Jesus is indeed depicted as God.
>If christians say
>Jesus is a prophet, believe me muslims and christians world will be
>unified
Christianity *does* say that Jesus is a prophet - *the* prophet, in fact, the
model from Whom all other prophets are drawn. What you mean is that you want
Christianity to say that Jesus is *only* a prophet, which cannot be; it would
make CHristianity something besides Christinaity, just as saying that the
Qur'an is only a book would make Islam something other than Islam. The heart
and soul of Christianity is the revelation that God the Son took on human form
in order to save all who trust in Him, and if we discard that, we have
discarded Christianity. That's not unity - it's the destruction of another
relgiion.
Robert McKay - GoffsCA - gof...@aol.com - thir...@juno.com
In the fall the war was always there, but we did not go to it any more.
---Ernest Hemingway
Feroze
GoffsCA <gof...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19971216170...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> >From: Zaher Kanafani <zk...@aub.edu.lb>
> >Date: Tue, Dec 16, 1997 11:02 EST
>
> >The main difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christians
> >claim that Jesus is God. This is fully rejected in Islam.
>
> True. Christianity looks at the totality of Biblical revelation, and
finds
> that Jesus is called God, is referred to in terms that can only apply to
God,
> and is worshipped as God. Therefore either a) Jesus is God, or b) the
entire
> Bible is a blasphemy.
> .....
Your last statement in the above paragraph should be corrected. You have
stated a) and b). But if you notice and reason logically b) as you have
stated "the entire Bible is a blasphemy" is not the opposite of a). Instead
b) should be "parts of the Bible where Jesus is referred to as God is a
blasphemy".
Now you will find in the Bible as it presently exists there are lot of
'modifications', 'changes' etc. as compared to copies that were present
earlier (even 10 years back). So doesn't that mean that there are more
chances of option b) as I have stated above to be true. You can easily
believe what you have stated and live the rest of your life like this. But
just remember: What if for some reason what you believed turned out to be
false? You will know this only after death, and then it may be too late.
That is why I encourage that we atleast try to logically reason out all
options.
Regards,
- Feroze
Zaher Kanafani
Suzan Fortin answered a posted message from Zaher Kanafani
> >> Why to say that God sacrificed Himself in an incarnated person,
> >> rather say the prophet Jesus sacrificed himself for the benefit
> >> of humanity.
>
> >>Because history tells me so. The testimony of the witnesses of the first
>>>apostles tells me so. They saw it. And they told it to their
disciples,
>> >and they testified to it. You can also tell because his death corresponds
>>>to the prophecies of the Jewish Scripture. If he were simply a
prophet,
>> >his apostles would not have recorded him as saying he is the Messiah and
>>>ONE with God. If this were such a hard thing to believe, the first
>>>Christians, who were Jewish and monotheistic, would surely not have
> >>believed it. Jesus gave many signs that he is Lord. Aside from all the
>> >miracles, he claimed the authority to forgive sins-- which only God can
>>>do. He claimed that he would be with us until the end of time-- which
only
>> >God can do.
>> Nonsense, remind you prophet Mohamed peace be upon him said he is the
>> prophet of God.
>But he didn't worship Jesus, so he's no prophet to me
Remind you that you did not answer the nonsense part of the question.
Also and Here is the big problem, your last sentence which is very very
unacceptable, fully rejected by all muslims and also by many christians:
Mohammed is not a prophet for you because he did not worship Jesus!!!
I will say: nobody wise will worship humans, nobody smart will worship
humans. You want our prophet Mohammed peace be upon him to worship
the previous sent prophet?! What a story.
I am asking christians to answer this question.
Regards
Zaher Kanafani
DW Suiter
Zaher Kanafani <zk...@aub.edu.lb> wrote:
You are correct Zaher. Jesus of Nazareth referred to himself as the
Son of God, which is misunderstood, for "Son" means "creation." "That"
which Jesus referred to was the mind and spirit within him which was
created by the works of the great Creator; the Living God. Jesus
referred to himself as the "Messiah" by possessing "that" which saves;
the works of the Father; the Almighty God. The "Saviour" was in him.
Never did Jesus say he was God; nor did he say he was the Father; but
in all things, honored the Living God; teaching all mankind to seek
and find the Living God, for in and of Him alone is salvation and
redemption.
Jesus taught mankind concerning the salvation of God; how this is
"done" by the works of the Father; the Living God. Jesus made many
statements to clarify who he was, and one being; "I of myself can do
nothing; it is the Father in me who does the works." Jesus always gave
honor and worship to the Father; the Living God in all things.
The works of Jesus which many of the perverted teachings believe to be
of the physical, were all of spirit. Jesus of Nazareth had no power
over the physical matters as false teachers teach. He opened the "eyes
of understanding" in man to see "that" which he spoke of. He opened
the ears of the deaf to hear the truth. He gave "life" to the
spiritually dead by giving the Word from the Living God, which is the
Seed of God; the Word of God; in which Word is life from God.
Yet, all his teachings could do nothing for those who did not believe
him; as is written; "He could do nothing because of their unbelief."
There is one God and Father of His children. Jesus of Nazareth was a
prophet; an apostle; and one who had received the promise of God which
saved and redeemed him; the mind and spirit which is the Creation of
God in mankind; as was first in Adam.
Mohammed was indeed a prophet of God who also gave glory and honor to
God alone as the Saviour and Redeemer of mankind. Whether he was a Son
of God or not depends on ones understanding of the word; "Son." If
Mohammed spoke Truth of God which he received from God, then he was
indeed a Son of God in this respect, for the "Son" of God is the
creation of God in man; that which is spirit; that which God inspires
in the mind of man.
Many of mankind have been prophets and Sons of God in this respect, as
scripture records. The error of man is always the same; to seek Truth
of God from the writings of man, including the prophets and Sons. All
true prophets and Sons of God, without fail, teach man to come to the
Father; the Living God; to learn His Truth. Any who does not honor nor
give glory to God in this same manner is not of God and does not speak
truth. Jesus declared and commanded; "Honor no man as Father or
Teacher; only Him above."
DW Suiter
"There are none so blind as those who refuse to see."
Zaher Kanafani
In article <19971216170...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
gof...@aol.com (GoffsCA) wrote:
>
> >From: Zaher Kanafani <zk...@aub.edu.lb>
> >Date: Tue, Dec 16, 1997 11:02 EST
>
> >The main difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christians
> >claim that Jesus is God. This is fully rejected in Islam.
>
> True. Christianity looks at the totality of Biblical revelation, and finds
> that Jesus is called God, is referred to in terms that can only apply to God,
> and is worshipped as God. Therefore either a) Jesus is God, or b) the entire
> Bible is a blasphemy.
>
Stop there, there are other possibilities, specially that you somewhat
agrees that Jesus is a prophet of God. So what you can put as a third
option is that in the bible the statement: prophet ( or messenger) of God
Jesus has been changed to God Jesus. There is the blasphemy. Muslims
believe in the Gospel and the Bible, but we testify that they have been
changed, specially regarding Jesus.
> >How can you say that Jesus claimed to be God, then you said he did not
> >asked his disciples to kneel and to prostrate in front of him.To whom
> >people will kneel and prostrate then?
>
> Worship is not the physical postures one places himself in. I could kneel to
> someone or something, or prostrate myself, and in my heart be secretly mocking
> and denying that thing or person. Worship - *true* worship - takes place in
> the heart. One need not assume X physical posture to worship. Indeed, there
> are people who are physically incapable of kneeling or prostration - would you
> claim that they are on that account incapable of worshipping? Of course not.
> But their worship would be apart from physical posture, as it is with *all*
> people. Thus, demanding a specific instance of someone adopting a specific
> posture in Jesus' presence is to demand that which is utterly irrelevant. You
> would do better to examine, as I mentioned above, the *totality* of the Bible,
> and notice that Jesus is indeed depicted as God.
>
Of course, worshipping is not only in kneeling and prostrating but these
must exist in the worshippness. Those who trully can not for physical
reasons try to do their best. God will forgive them. Worshipping in heart
is important but not sufficient because many lie. In all Jesus life, did
you record any kneeling or prostrating? If not this is a proof that Jesus
is not God.
> >If christians say
> >Jesus is a prophet, believe me muslims and christians world will be
> >unified
>
> Christianity *does* say that Jesus is a prophet - *the* prophet, in fact, the
> model from Whom all other prophets are drawn. What you mean is that you want
> Christianity to say that Jesus is *only* a prophet, which cannot be; it would
> make CHristianity something besides Christinaity, just as saying that the
> Qur'an is only a book would make Islam something other than Islam. The heart
> and soul of Christianity is the revelation that God the Son took on human form
> in order to save all who trust in Him, and if we discard that, we have
> discarded Christianity. That's not unity - it's the destruction of another
> relgiion.
I understand what you are saying, but it is like you are putting your
face on the wall. But believe me, Islam is the last religion come into
that world after christianity and complete it. Many Koranic verses spoke
that Jesus is only a prophet, study them. The Koran contains also many
scientific miracles which have been recently discovered, study them.
Regards Zaher Kanafani and messenger of God. Study that
>
> Robert McKay - GoffsCA - gof...@aol.com - thir...@juno.com
> In the fall the war was always there, but we did not go to it any more.
> ---Ernest Hemingway
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
Mike & Sunny
Zaher Kanafani wrote:
>
> The main difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christians
> claim that Jesus is God. This is fully rejected in Islam.
Jesus Christ said, "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every Word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." He also
said, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." And, "Thou shalt worship
the Lord thy God, and only Him shalt thou serve."
And, He also said during the parable of the lost son, "And he said unto
him, Son, thou art ever with me; and all that I have is thine."
--
Feel free to visit the folowing WebPage, and always turn to the Word of
God. http://www.sagelink.net/lords/park.htm
God's salvation is for the Un-Godly. Not the Godly (Romans 4:5).
Click here to send mailto:Sunny...@Lords.Com
Zaher Kanafani
In article <3497e13b...@nntp.usit.net>,
gen...@usit.net wrote:
> You are correct Zaher. Jesus of Nazareth referred to himself as the
> Son of God, which is misunderstood, for "Son" means "creation." "That"
> which Jesus referred to was the mind and spirit within him which was
> created by the works of the great Creator; the Living God. Jesus
> referred to himself as the "Messiah" by possessing "that" which saves;
> the works of the Father; the Almighty God. The "Saviour" was in him
> Never did Jesus say he was God; nor did he say he was the Father; but
> in all things, honored the Living God; teaching all mankind to seek
> and find the Living God, for in and of Him alone is salvation and
> redemption.
I am happy to know you. Jesus did never say he was God. That is
fundamental. All christians must remove any idea about Jesus is God.
About the word "son", Islam taught us not to use it with Humans. We use
the words prophet of God, messenger of God instead. The word "son" has
some connotations in it so that it can be misunderstood as now.
> Jesus taught mankind concerning the salvation of God; how this is
> "done" by the works of the Father; the Living God. Jesus made many
> statements to clarify who he was, and one being; "I of myself can do
> nothing; it is the Father in me who does the works." Jesus always gave
> honor and worship to the Father; the Living God in all things.
Good statement, "I of myself can do nothing", it is in God' will.
The Koran narrated us about Jesus's miracles you are telling, and that
they ere in God's will. Also we do not use the word "father" for God,
like the word "son", it has some connotations which may be misunderstood.
Use the word Lord instead.
> The works of Jesus which many of the perverted teachings believe to be
> of the physical, were all of spirit. Jesus of Nazareth had no power
> over the physical matters as false teachers teach. He opened the "eyes
> of understanding" in man to see "that" which he spoke of. He opened
> the ears of the deaf to hear the truth. He gave "life" to the
> spiritually dead by giving the Word from the Living God, which is the
> Seed of God; the Word of God; in which Word is life from God.
>
> Yet, all his teachings could do nothing for those who did not believe
> him; as is written; "He could do nothing because of their unbelief."
Good, I agree with you.
> There is one God and Father of His children. Jesus of Nazareth was a
> prophet; an apostle; and one who had received the promise of God which
> saved and redeemed him; the mind and spirit which is the Creation of
> God in mankind; as was first in Adam.
> Mohammed was indeed a prophet of God who also gave glory and honor to
> God alone as the Saviour and Redeemer of mankind. Whether he was a Son
> of God or not depends on ones understanding of the word; "Son." If
> Mohammed spoke Truth of God which he received from God, then he was
> indeed a Son of God in this respect, for the "Son" of God is the
> creation of God in man; that which is spirit; that which God inspires
> in the mind of man.
I am very happy with you, you like the truth. May God help you in your
seek for the truth. As before we say Mohammed was the prophet and
messenger of God, like the others. Do not use the word "son". I hope that
these messages may be read by all people, specially christians.
> Many of mankind have been prophets and Sons of God in this respect, as
> scripture records. The error of man is always the same; to seek Truth
> of God from the writings of man, including the prophets and Sons. All
> true prophets and Sons of God, without fail, teach man to come to the
> Father; the Living God; to learn His Truth. Any who does not honor nor
> give glory to God in this same manner is not of God and does not speak
> truth. Jesus declared and commanded; "Honor no man as Father or
> Teacher; only Him above."
>
> DW Suiter
>
> "There are none so blind as those who refuse to see."
I nearly agree with all you said, I liked your writings, only and please,
the only difference is some words use (son and father). I am pleased that
you believe in prophet Mohammed and the Koran. Please remain in contact so
that we can exchange and comments our beliefs specially for others.
Regards.
I will follow and answers any comment.
DW Suiter
Zaher Kanafani <zk...@aub.edu.lb> wrote:
(clipped for space)
>I nearly agree with all you said, I liked your writings, only and please,
>the only difference is some words use (son and father). I am pleased that
>you believe in prophet Mohammed and the Koran. Please remain in contact so
>that we can exchange and comments our beliefs specially for others.
>Regards.
>I will follow and answers any comment.
>Zaher Kanafani
>
>-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Any man who honors and worships the Living God as Saviour and Redeemer
loves God.
When semantics and understandings of words and their true definition
become confused, conflicts arise. The wise man understands the
conflict is not between himself and the other, but the conflict is
between the differing understandings or definitions.
In declaring himself to be the Son of God, Jesus did not refer to his
physical being, but the mind and spirit of his true self. The word
"Son" merely means "offspring."
Lack of understanding of how the Living God creates mankind in His
image has caused many conflicts.
The apostle Paul taught of this matter in speaking of the "old man"
who "dies;" and the new man who is the "new creation" of God. Paul
spoke of spiritual matters, not carnal nor physical matters.
"Christianity" has been ruled by leaders who are of a carnal mind who
have interpreted scriptures by this carnal mind teaching these matters
of God to be of the physical.
God is Spirit and matters pertaining to God are spiritual matters. The
physical body dies as God designed it to die. The "soul" passes on.
Jesus of Nazareth taught the way by which man may be "transformed" by
the works of God. In this way, man receives the Word and teachings
directly from the Living God which destroys all matters in the mind
placed there by mankind. The old person who was dies away and a new
person emerges because of the Word and teachings of God which teach
man how to live the life He desires. This process is what Jesus taught
as the way by which one becomes a "Son" or "Creation" of God; as Adam
was the Creation of God in His image and likeness which is Spirit.
I haver not read the writings of your religion, but I shall so I may
know what is written, and what is believed by yourself and others.
Remember this principle; differences between mankind are of the mind;
of what man has believed as he has been taught. The brotherhood of man
should not suffer from these differences, but the truth of these
matters should be sought in order to unite mankind as God wills. It is
correct to have faith in God, that by His wisdom and works, He shall
unite all mankind with Himself. When this time comes, then the lion
shall lay down with the lamb, and there shall be peace on earth among
all mankind.
Let all who love God, speak of Him and His love, teaching all to seek
Him; learn of and from Him.
In the love of God,
AltWay
In article <3499fa05...@nntp.usit.net>, gen...@usit.net (DW Suiter)
wrote:
" When semantics and understandings of words and their true definition
become confused, conflicts arise. The wise man understands the
conflict is not between himself and the other, but the conflict is
between the differing understandings or definitions.
"In declaring himself to be the Son of God, Jesus did not refer to his
physical being, but the mind and spirit of his true self. The word
"Son" merely means "offspring."
who "dies;" and the new man who is the "new creation" of God. Paul
spoke of spiritual matters, not carnal nor physical matters.
"Christianity" has been ruled by leaders who are of a carnal mind who
have interpreted scriptures by this carnal mind teaching these matters
of God to be of the physical.
"God is Spirit and matters pertaining to God are spiritual matters. The
physical body dies as God designed it to die. The "soul" passes on.
"Jesus of Nazareth taught the way by which man may be "transformed" by
the works of God. In this way, man receives the Word and teachings
directly from the Living God which destroys all matters in the mind
placed there by mankind. The old person who was dies away and a new
person emerges because of the Word and teachings of God which teach
man how to live the life He desires. This process is what Jesus taught
as the way by which one becomes a "Son" or "Creation" of God; as Adam
was the Creation of God in His image and likeness which is Spirit.
Him; learn of and from Him.
I agree with most of all this. Unfortunately many Christians and others do
not see things in the same way as you do.
H.S.Aziz
--
_ ___ _ _____________________________________________
|_| | | | | |_| \ / /
| | |_ | |/\| | | | /... Read "The Alternative Way" for more info
_______________________/ ha...@argonet.co.uk - www.argonet.co.uk/education/haziz
D. Denton
On Fri, 19 Dec 1997, DW Suiter wrote:
> When semantics and understandings of words and their true definition
> become confused, conflicts arise. The wise man understands the
> conflict is not between himself and the other, but the conflict is
> between the differing understandings or definitions.
>
> In declaring himself to be the Son of God, Jesus did not refer to his
> physical being, but the mind and spirit of his true self. The word
> "Son" merely means "offspring."
Well, DW, I have one question for you:
In that case, what of Jesus telling the Pharisees, "Truly, truly I say to
you, before Abraham was, I AM" (John 8:58)
If this was a mere semantic slip, why were the Pharisees so mortified?
> Lack of understanding of how the Living God creates mankind in His
> image has caused many conflicts.
Merely note that I've been having LONG controversies with our Muslim
brethren on THAT point ... (albeit civil ones, thanks be)
> God is Spirit and matters pertaining to God are spiritual matters. The
> physical body dies as God designed it to die. The "soul" passes on.
Platonist slip?
> Remember this principle; differences between mankind are of the mind;
> of what man has believed as he has been taught. The brotherhood of man
> should not suffer from these differences, but the truth of these
> matters should be sought in order to unite mankind as God wills. It is
> correct to have faith in God, that by His wisdom and works, He shall
> unite all mankind with Himself. When this time comes, then the lion
> shall lay down with the lamb, and there shall be peace on earth among
> all mankind.
Now, friend, you yourself, if I recall correctly, have occasionally cited
the Son's "coming with a sword" in regard to these differences -
particularly when disagreed with. Can you reconcile?
pokoj s tebou
deezer
D.Denton |"It's the goodies and the baddies, the Blue
dee...@u.washington.edu | Meanies and the rest. I think I'll win because
Rock & Roll Boy Scout & | I believe in what Jesus said."
Roamin' Cat'lik Slavist | - John Lennon
|
Alternate reply address to appear soon. (Don't you *hate* spam?)
DW Suiter
"D. Denton" <dee...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Dec 1997, DW Suiter wrote:
>
>> When semantics and understandings of words and their true definition
>> become confused, conflicts arise. The wise man understands the
>> conflict is not between himself and the other, but the conflict is
>> between the differing understandings or definitions.
>>
>> In declaring himself to be the Son of God, Jesus did not refer to his
>> physical being, but the mind and spirit of his true self. The word
>> "Son" merely means "offspring."
>
>Well, DW, I have one question for you:
>
>In that case, what of Jesus telling the Pharisees, "Truly, truly I say to
>you, before Abraham was, I AM" (John 8:58)
Jesus of Nazareth spoke of himself as a "type" and "kind" of person;
the Son and Creation of God which first existed in Adam. Jesus
declared that he; as the Creation of God; existed in Adam, before
Abraham.
>If this was a mere semantic slip, why were the Pharisees so mortified?
>
>> Lack of understanding of how the Living God creates mankind in His
>> image has caused many conflicts.
>
>Merely note that I've been having LONG controversies with our Muslim
>brethren on THAT point ... (albeit civil ones, thanks be)
>
>> God is Spirit and matters pertaining to God are spiritual matters. The
>> physical body dies as God designed it to die. The "soul" passes on.
>
>Platonist slip?
>
>> Remember this principle; differences between mankind are of the mind;
>> of what man has believed as he has been taught. The brotherhood of man
>> should not suffer from these differences, but the truth of these
>> matters should be sought in order to unite mankind as God wills. It is
>> correct to have faith in God, that by His wisdom and works, He shall
>> unite all mankind with Himself. When this time comes, then the lion
>> shall lay down with the lamb, and there shall be peace on earth among
>> all mankind.
>
>Now, friend, you yourself, if I recall correctly, have occasionally cited
>the Son's "coming with a sword" in regard to these differences -
>particularly when disagreed with. Can you reconcile?
Yes. Before the "Kingdom of God" is established with all mankind,
fiorst comes the great tribulation; "Armageddon;" a spiritual war
fought between the Sons of God (Light) and the sons of darkness.
(those of the darkened counsel of man) Words are soirit and the war is
of and between these words. The Word of God returns as John wrote in
his "revelation" as the Fiery Sword of Truth, to destroy the enemy of
God and man; the lie and the liar. In and by this Word and Truth, the
lie is destroyed.
Then the Living God shall save and redeem all mankind as He has
declared, returning these to where Adam fell away from; a relationship
with Him where He is Father, and man; the Son. At this time it shall
be as Jesus declared; "All shall know God and all shall be taught by
God. When these works of God are finished, He shall rest from His
works and it is the Sabboth; the Seventh day of rest for God and man,
for man shall have been restored to where he fell away from long ago
in Adam.
Take Care and Merry Christmas to you and yours.
>pokoj s tebou
>
>deezer
>
>D.Denton |"It's the goodies and the baddies, the Blue
>dee...@u.washington.edu | Meanies and the rest. I think I'll win because
>Rock & Roll Boy Scout & | I believe in what Jesus said."
>Roamin' Cat'lik Slavist | - John Lennon
> |
> Alternate reply address to appear soon. (Don't you *hate* spam?)
>
>
>
DW Suiter
Eggman 64
>
> You are correct Zaher. Jesus of Nazareth referred to himself as the
> Son of God, which is misunderstood, for "Son" means "creation." "That"
> which Jesus referred to was the mind and spirit within him which was
> created by the works of the great Creator; the Living God.
You are very wrong in this part.
This shows that you don't have any understandings about the
time that Jesus lived.
Jesus called God HIS father.
Why would this upset the jews so much that they crucifeid Him?
Because, in the way Jesus said it, it meant that He was Gods SON.
If He didn't mean it this, way, He would have said :"God is OUR father"
This wouldn't have upsetted the jews.
By the way, do you get your facts from the Quran or the bible?
The bible was written over a period of 1600 years with more than 40
writers and 66 different books who all express the same, powerful
message.
The Quran was written 500 years after Christ, by Muhammed, who got his
revelation
from an Angel, contradicting the scriptures from the time that Jesus
lived.
Read Galatians 1 and be honest about your beliefs and feelings.
Try to think with your head too, because God also created the ratio.
> Jesus
> referred to himself as the "Messiah" by possessing "that" which saves;
> the works of the Father; the Almighty God. The "Saviour" was in him.
>
> Never did Jesus say he was God; nor did he say he was the Father; but
> in all things, honored the Living God; teaching all mankind to seek
> and find the Living God, for in and of Him alone is salvation and
> redemption.
"I am in the Father and the Father is in Me, whosoever has seen Me has
seen
the Father ...for the Father and I are one"
>
> Jesus taught mankind concerning the salvation of God; how this is
> "done" by the works of the Father; the Living God. Jesus made many
> statements to clarify who he was, and one being; "I of myself can do
> nothing; it is the Father in me who does the works." Jesus always gave
> honor and worship to the Father; the Living God in all things.
>
>
That's certainly true.
>The works of Jesus which many of the perverted teachings believe to be
> of the physical, were all of spirit. Jesus of Nazareth had no power
> over the physical matters as false teachers teach. He opened the "eyes
> of understanding" in man to see "that" which he spoke of. He opened
> the ears of the deaf to hear the truth. He gave "life" to the
> spiritually dead by giving the Word from the Living God, which is the
> Seed of God; the Word of God; in which Word is life from God.
>
THATS SO FALSE! It contradicts so many historical writers.
(Roman, Greek etc) Many of them didn't believe in Jesus but they wrote
that He could physically heal a body.
I've seen many healings in my church, in the name of Jesus Christ.
In fact, I know many of them.
Jesus can heal both body AND soul.
> Yet, all his teachings could do nothing for those who did not believe
> him; as is written; "He could do nothing because of their unbelief."
That is because it works trough faith.
The woman who touched his rope, was healed by FAITH.
Many touched Him, but when the Woman touched Him, so was healed, because
of her
FAITH. (that's a VERB)
AerisD
Eggman wrote:
<<Jesus called God HIS father.>>
He also said (acc to the New Testament) that we ALL are children
of God.
<<Why would this upset the jews so much that they crucifeid Him?>>
The Jews didn't like someone "rebelling" against the order they had at the
time, enciting conflict between the Jews and the Romans, and questioning
the authority of the Sanhedrin. Note that acc to the New Testament the
Jews enticed the Roman authorities to arrest Jesus because of their claim
that Jesus said he was "THE KING OF THE JEWS" which was a slap in
the face of the Roman potentate, and why they taunted him by putting the
crown of thorns, the tattered robe, and the sign (kingof the jews) on top
of his cross..
<<If He didn't mean it this, way, He would have said :"God is OUR father"
This wouldn't have upsetted the jews.>>
Sorry to tell you this, friend, but are you familiar with the prayer Jesus
taught
his followers?
OUR FATHER
who art in heaven,
hallowed be Thy Name.
Thy Kingdom come.
Thy Will be done,
on Earth as it is in Heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us,
and lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from Evil.
Why would a person who thought he was God (acc to your assertion) teach
his followers to pray to a MUTUALl God, separate from himself, and refer to
God's
kingdom and powers as "Thine/Thy" and not "Mine/My"??????
Also, aren't you familiar with the text that states that prior to Jesus being
arrested HE PRAYED TO GOD THAT HIS FATE WOULD BE LIFTED FROM
HIS SHOULDERS. Also, aren't you familiar with the text that states that while
he was on the cross HE PRAYED TO GOD AND ASKED WHY GOD HAD
FORSAKEN HIM!
Obviously, Jesus did NOT think he was God. He had a very clear view of
God being other than himself.
> Yet, all his teachings could do nothing for those who did not believe
> him; as is written; "He could do nothing because of their unbelief."
You're confusing his teaching with his healing. His teachings are
universally true -- regardless of the religion -- his healing was immediate and
directly related to a given individual who had the power to reject his healing
due to disbelief.
-Salam
Karin Ferguson
I would also like to add a bit to what AerisD has written.
If Christ thought He was God... who did He pray to in the Garden of
Gesthemane. Also.. every Christian has read where Christ has said:
"My doctrine is not mine own.. but His who sent me."
Those who declare that Jesus is God, in my experience ... are
mostly Catholics.
Karin Ferguson
AltWay
Dear Abu Farsi,
My e-mail reply to your enquiry was returned to me saying that they could
not find you on ea...@redshift.com.
Zaher Kanafani
In article <dcocN6AO...@allestree.demon.co.uk>,
janet <ja...@take.this.out.allestree.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> In article <882369706....@dejanews.com>, Zaher Kanafani
> <zk...@aub.edu.lb> writes
> >I understand what you are saying, but it is like you are putting your
> >face on the wall. But believe me, Islam is the last religion come into
> >that world after christianity and complete it. Many Koranic verses spoke
> >that Jesus is only a prophet, study them. The Koran contains also many
> >scientific miracles which have been recently discovered, study them.
> >Regards Zaher Kanafani and messenger of God. Study that
> >
> >>
> if I ask something that has been spoken of before, AND if I take it a
> bit off topic, (but I hope you will see why I ask, and then see that it
> IS, more or less, on topic...).
Hello.
> While researching about women in Islam, (I teach women's studies...), I
> read over and over again that many devout Muslims believe that the Koran
> should never be translated, and that it should not be read by just
> anyone, by certain people at certain times, and so on.
Muslims believe that the Koran is God's words and contain many miracles
that I should post some of them later. In this sense the real meaning can
not be translated. But muslims are urged and encouraged to translated the
meaning of the Koran to all languages ( now specially English) so that
people understand it. People also are encouraged to learn arabic so that
they can understand the Koran directly. All people without exeption are
encouraged to read, learn and so on at any time.
> Then I found an English copy online, which I downloaded, but have not
> read, fully.
I encourage you to do so.
> The teacher/researcher in me says, "Read it!" so that I can know whether
> those who quote it in support of (often opposite) ideas are doing so
> accurately. If I am to talk about women in Islam, surely I should read
> the primary source, yes?
The research about women in Islam is very sensitive and crucial, Today
many say that women have no rights nor freedom in Islam. The contrary is
true, Women in Islam are simply not goods that we sell in the street.
They are like jewels that we must protect and take care about.
So be sure about your references.
> The ecumenical, respecter of other people's beleifs, though, wants to
> know what the general feeling amoung Muslims is about these issues!
>
> I would very much like to read it, BUT I also want to respect the wishes
> and customs which surround it, by those who hold it to be a holy book!
Good ethics, I am proud about you.
> This is where it gets back on topic, you see: *can* we study the Koran,
> without showing disrespect to either it or the Muslim faith? Is the
> English copy ok? (I hope so, it's about my only option!)
Study, Ask me questions, ask others, these are your rights. The english
copy is OK for the first steps .
> Are there other things we should be aware of, so as not to show
> inadvertant disrespect?
You are seeking for the truth, you have good ethics, I respect you
in advance.
> (I'm sorry if these sound like an odd questions, I assure you they are
> sincere ones!)
I am sure that they are sincere ones and I thank you.
> janet
Zaher Kanafani, I will follow and comment your posts.
> Whether the angels play only Bach in praising God I am not quite sure;
> I am sure, however, that 'en famille', they play Mozart
> Karl Barth
There were not Bach nor Mozart when the angels were.
Stephen M. Dodd
Eggman 64 wrote:
> >
> > You are correct Zaher. Jesus of Nazareth referred to himself as the
> > Son of God, which is misunderstood, for "Son" means "creation." "That"
> > which Jesus referred to was the mind and spirit within him which was
> > created by the works of the great Creator; the Living God.
>
> You are very wrong in this part.
> This shows that you don't have any understandings about the
> time that Jesus lived.
> Jesus called God HIS father.
You have no idea what Jesus said. It was in another language and it is all
mixed up now.
Omar
--
-
- Stephen M. Dodd
- New World Productions
- 541 754-7757; http://www.sdodd.com
janet
In article <34A0A4CC...@sdodd.com>, "Stephen M. Dodd"
<sd...@sdodd.com> writes
>
>
>Eggman 64 wrote:
>
>> >
>> > You are correct Zaher. Jesus of Nazareth referred to himself as the
>> > Son of God, which is misunderstood, for "Son" means "creation." "That"
>> > which Jesus referred to was the mind and spirit within him which was
>> > created by the works of the great Creator; the Living God.
>>
>> This shows that you don't have any understandings about the
>> time that Jesus lived.
>> Jesus called God HIS father.
>
>You have no idea what Jesus said. It was in another language and it is all
>mixed up now.
>
This is not overly helpful.
I do not have the original languages, no.
But there are those that do: have you any idea of the languages which
are *required* for entry into the likes of hte Biblicum?
We may not have the original texts, but we have many that go back almost
that far, we, well, the scholars can understand and work with the
languages...
Which is why there has recently been a new version of the Vulgate
issued.
>Omar
>--
>-
>- Stephen M. Dodd
>- New World Productions
>- 541 754-7757; http://www.sdodd.com
>
>
--
janet
D. Denton
On Tue, 23 Dec 1997, Stephen M. Dodd wrote:
> > You are very wrong in this part.
> > This shows that you don't have any understandings about the
> > time that Jesus lived.
> > Jesus called God HIS father.
>
> You have no idea what Jesus said. It was in another language and it is all
> mixed up now.
>
> Omar
(sigh) Well, by that line of reasoning, there would be no reason to accept
what the Koran says about Jesus and/or what He said, on the same grounds:
that it is in a different language and got mixed up in translation.
Now, concievably, one might reply that the Koran bypasses that difficulty
due to being a direct revelation from God - but that throws us back into
the same difficulty. Since I don't speak the 6th century Arabic in which
the Koran was written (and neither does anyone else, 14 centuries after
the fact) there would be no possible way for me to accept the Koran's
statements as reliable, whether in the original or in translation.
Omar, forgive me, but if you expect to prove anything to Protocol13 and
the others who've been giving you grief (or anyone else for that matter)
you'll have to do drastically better in your arguments than you have to
date. I'm in no position to asess your scholarship, but your reasoning is
of abominably poor quality. Aristotle is probably spinning in his grave.
Just trying to help -
John McGough
Karin Ferguson wrote that in her experiences Catholics are the ones who
think Jesus is God.
Bzzt! Wrong. I'm Catholic and I say Jesus is NOT God. Read the above
posts again. They will answer your questions.
John
Stephen M. Dodd
D. Denton wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Dec 1997, Stephen M. Dodd wrote:
>
> > > You are very wrong in this part.
> > > This shows that you don't have any understandings about the
> > > time that Jesus lived.
> > > Jesus called God HIS father.
> >
> > You have no idea what Jesus said. It was in another language and it is all
> > mixed up now.
> >
> > Omar
>
> (sigh) Well, by that line of reasoning, there would be no reason to accept
> what the Koran says about Jesus and/or what He said, on the same grounds:
> that it is in a different language and got mixed up in translation.
Arabic speakers are not mixed up. Christians are. You have lost the language of
the revelation you follow.
> Now, concievably, one might reply that the Koran bypasses that difficulty
> due to being a direct revelation from God - but that throws us back into
The Qur'an does not bypass anything. It is a revlation from God. You are
bypassing that.
> the same difficulty. Since I don't speak the 6th century Arabic in which
> the Koran was written (and neither does anyone else, 14 centuries after
The Qur'an is not a "book" it is speech.
> the fact) there would be no possible way for me to accept the Koran's
> statements as reliable, whether in the original or in translation.
We have the Qur'an. You do not have the words of Jesus.
> Omar, forgive me, but if you expect to prove anything to Protocol13 and
> the others who've been giving you grief (or anyone else for that matter)
I suffer no grief at all except that Allah wishes. No one can make another
suffer as suffering and blessings are in the hands of God.
I have no need of protocol13. I merely correct obvious simple errors in
presentations of persons not understanding Islam.
> you'll have to do drastically better in your arguments than you have to
> date. I'm in no position to asess your scholarship, but your reasoning is
> of abominably poor quality. Aristotle is probably spinning in his grave.
Aristotle is not a prophet of God. I am not discussing logic. Intellignet
people can use logic to twist anything. These issues need facts not logic. I
discuss facts and you are ignoring them. We have the Qur'an. No one has the
words of Jesus.
> Just trying to help -
No you are not. You are arguing against Islam and I will reject your arguments
as long as you continue to make false statements.
Omar
> deezer
>
> D.Denton |"It's the goodies and the baddies, the Blue
> dee...@u.washington.edu | Meanies and the rest. I think I'll win because
> Rock & Roll Boy Scout & | I believe in what Jesus said."
> Roamin' Cat'lik Slavist | - John Lennon
> |
> Alternate reply address to appear soon. (Don't you *hate* spam?)
--
Iftikhar
I have not read your previous posts. If you do not believe Jesus (pbuh) as
God or a part of God how do you define his role ?
--
Iftikhar I. Barrie
External Contractor
Systems and Database Administration
Read about ISLAM ...
World Islamic Propagation Centre -> http://www.virtual-pc.com/wipecrc/
Islam, Christianity, and Science -> http://www.maxinet.com/yusuf/yusuf.htm
What they say about Islam ->
http://funnelweb.utcc.utk.edu/~eljazzar/personal/Islam/what-they-say-about-i
slam.html
The Islam Page -> http://www.wam.umd.edu/~ibrahim/
The Arabic Paper -> http://www.flash.net/~royal/islam.html
Search the Quran and Hadith ->
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/reference.html
It is the Truth ! -> http://www.it-is-truth.org
John McGough wrote in message <67repm$dna$1...@newsd-124.bryant.webtv.net>...
D. Denton
On Wed, 24 Dec 1997, Stephen M. Dodd wrote:
> > > > You are very wrong in this part.
> > > > This shows that you don't have any understandings about the
> > > > time that Jesus lived.
> > > > Jesus called God HIS father.
> > >
> > > You have no idea what Jesus said. It was in another language and it is all
> > > mixed up now.
> > >
> > > Omar
> >
> > (sigh) Well, by that line of reasoning, there would be no reason to accept
> > what the Koran says about Jesus and/or what He said, on the same grounds:
> > that it is in a different language and got mixed up in translation.
>
> Arabic speakers are not mixed up. Christians are. You have lost the language of
> the revelation you follow.
May we have some proof of this, please? And I mean clear, demonstrable
proof based in historical fact. Simply repeating the same arguments over
and over doesn't count.
Also, the briefest familiarity with linguistics will tell you that present
day Arabic has about as much similarity to the Koranic language as
present-day English does to the language of 6th century England - i.e.
very little. The proof lies in the God-given natural laws of linguistics.
Put simply, languages just don't stay that stable over that much time. I
can go into more detail about that if you're interested in examining
evidence on its merits.
> > Now, concievably, one might reply that the Koran bypasses that difficulty
> > due to being a direct revelation from God - but that throws us back into
>
> The Qur'an does not bypass anything. It is a revlation from God. You are
> bypassing that.
That's *exactly* what I just said there. You might try answering the
statement as a statement rather than simply tossing in fragments here and
there.
>
> > the same difficulty. Since I don't speak the 6th century Arabic in which
> > the Koran was written (and neither does anyone else, 14 centuries after
>
> The Qur'an is not a "book" it is speech.
>
> > the fact) there would be no possible way for me to accept the Koran's
> > statements as reliable, whether in the original or in translation.
>
> We have the Qur'an. You do not have the words of Jesus.
Well, the Qur'an is speech that has been written down, as are
all books. That still doesn't disprove my point.
As for the Words of Jesus - does the Koran leave these out? If so, I would
find that strange, given His importance as a prophet in the Islamic faith.
Does the Qur'an contain the words of Jesus? (I wouldn't know - I'm asking
*you*.)
> > Omar, forgive me, but if you expect to prove anything to Protocol13 and
> > the others who've been giving you grief (or anyone else for that matter)
>
> I suffer no grief at all except that Allah wishes. No one can make another
> suffer as suffering and blessings are in the hands of God.
Well, I'm glad for you, then.
>
> I have no need of protocol13. I merely correct obvious simple errors in
> presentations of persons not understanding Islam.
Mmm ... may I humbly suggest you get in touch with Zaher about that? He's
been doing a good job on his postings.
>
> > you'll have to do drastically better in your arguments than you have to
> > date. I'm in no position to asess your scholarship, but your reasoning is
> > of abominably poor quality. Aristotle is probably spinning in his grave.
>
> Aristotle is not a prophet of God. I am not discussing logic. Intellignet
> people can use logic to twist anything. These issues need facts not logic. I
> discuss facts and you are ignoring them. We have the Qur'an. No one has the
> words of Jesus.
>
Well, as to that:
1) I did not say that Aristotle was a prophet. But he was a wise fellow
who laid down some useful principles on proofs, correct observation of
facts, and the use of one's God-given mind.
2) Facts when correctly observed can be demonstrated by logic - the whole
point of logic is to discover, explain, and prove facts. Flawed logic
shows itself by not holding up against fact.
3) Be charitable and assume I'm ignorant. In that case, how would you
expect me to accept as fact anything you've stated, given that you've
provided no convincing proof? That's the thing I'm taking issue with,
here. You're making assertions without giving any proof to back them up.
I could just as easily state to you, "Yes, we DO have the words of Jesus,
in the New Testament, and the Qur'an is a lie." But to say that, by
itself, does not prove either statement to be true - I have to back them
up with something. (And for what it's worth, I have no quarrel in
particular with the Qur'an. I say all this as someone who holds Islam and
its followers in high regard.)
But if you want to convince me of anything, you ought to do a better job
of stating it. Take the example from your coreligionists Zaher and AltWay
- who provide proofs to back their statements, make careful arguments and
answers, and do so without showing the least disrespect for anyone's
intellect or good will.
I look forward to resuming this debate on a higher level.
pokoj s tebou
deezer
John McGough
Iftikhar said:
I have not read your previous posts. If you do not believe Jesus as God
or a part of God how do you define his role?
___________________________________
First, I wasn't refering to my posts. I didn't make any prior ones in
this thread. I was refering to others' posts in this thread. I felt a
few of them explained things very well.
Jesus is NOT seen as God in any Christians' eyes that I personally know
of. Nor do we feel Jesus was a part of God in the physical sense. His
(Jesus') TEACHINGS embodied the SPIRIT of God, the WORD of God, thereby
making him "God-like" (for the lack of a better term). To put it in
modern terms, he was guilty by association. You might not have known
your friend stole an apple from the store while you were with him, but
the store's manager will look at you as if you are a thief too.
You are taking the words of the Bible too literally. It is literature.
Symbolism and imagery is at work. We use the word 'SON' of God as just
another way of saying Prophet of God. When you use the English word
"son" literally it means "the male offspring of another male (a father)
created by the planting of a seed (sperm)". When you use the word "son"
figuratively, it means a "follower close to, next to, and/or of the same
vein of another. Jesus is considered the Son of God in the figurative
sense. The spiritual seed of God was planted in Jesus thereby making him
that son. Most Christians believe Jesus to be THE prophet of God; the
most important Prophet. That's all.
It's all figurative and spiritual, folks. That's it.
John
MErrY cHrIStMaS!
Rahat Husain change z to s)
On Wed, 24 Dec 1997 15:46:00 -0500, jay...@webtv.net (John McGough)
wrote:
>Iftikhar said:
>
>I have not read your previous posts. If you do not believe Jesus as God
>or a part of God how do you define his role?
As a messenger of God. He is not a part of God. Just as a letter you
may have written is not a part of you, we do not believe Jeus to be
God.
>Jesus is NOT seen as God in any Christians' eyes that I personally know
>of. Nor do we feel Jesus was a part of God in the physical sense. His
>(Jesus') TEACHINGS embodied the SPIRIT of God, the WORD of God, thereby
>making him "God-like" (for the lack of a better term). To put it in
>modern terms, he was guilty by association. You might not have known
>your friend stole an apple from the store while you were with him, but
>the store's manager will look at you as if you are a thief too.
Most of the Christians i have spoken to believe him to be part of God.
An anallogy comparing Jesus to God, by a christian friend of mine: He
is like the 3 states of water, as Jesus he may be water, as Christ he
may be ice, and as God he may be gas. Jesus was a prophet but the
only thing divine about him was his knowledge.
>You are taking the words of the Bible too literally. It is literature.
>Symbolism and imagery is at work. We use the word 'SON' of God as just
>another way of saying Prophet of God. When you use the English word
>"son" literally it means "the male offspring of another male (a father)
>created by the planting of a seed (sperm)". When you use the word "son"
>figuratively, it means a "follower close to, next to, and/or of the same
>vein of another. Jesus is considered the Son of God in the figurative
>sense. The spiritual seed of God was planted in Jesus thereby making him
>that son. Most Christians believe Jesus to be THE prophet of God; the
>most important Prophet. That's all.
>
This view depends upon what kind of Christian you are aka which school
of Teaching you follow: Catholic, Presbyterian etc.
>It's all figurative and spiritual, folks. That's it.
>
>John
>
>MErrY cHrIStMaS!
Eid Mubarak.
AerisD
Omar wrote:
<<Arabic speakers are not mixed up. Christians are. You have lost the
<<language of the revelation you follow.
Excuse me, but the VAST majority of muslims are not Arabic speakers,
and often CANNOT EVEN PRONOUNCE the Arabic words/phrases
correctly, let alone understand them in their full meaning. They are not "in
touch" with the Arabic meaning of the Qur'an, ahadith, etc. So, the majority
of muslims have lost the language of the revelation they follow acc to your
logic.
<<The Qur'an does not bypass anything. It is a revlation from God. You are
<<bypassing that.
And the Psalms are a revelation also acc to Islam. How do we explain that
ALL MUSLIMS are out of touch with the language they were written in?????
<<The Qur'an is not a "book" it is speech.
Let us not split hairs here. The Qur'an is a book of text that was once
spoken.
<<We have the Qur'an. You do not have the words of Jesus.
Actually, the apocryphal texts do quote Jesus, as the ahadith quote Muhammad.
<<No you are not. You are arguing against Islam and I will reject your
arguments
<<as long as you continue to make false statements.
You remind me of a character in the movie Dumb and Dumber who, when
he didn't want to hear something, stuck his fingers in his ears and repeated
the phrase "La la la la la" until the speaker stopped.
-Salam
John McGough
Thank you, Sandy. I stand corrected.
John
Stephen M. Dodd
AerisD wrote:
> Omar wrote:
> <<Arabic speakers are not mixed up. Christians are. You have lost the
> <<language of the revelation you follow.
>
> Excuse me, but the VAST majority of muslims are not Arabic speakers,
> and often CANNOT EVEN PRONOUNCE the Arabic words/phrases
> correctly, let alone understand them in their full meaning. They are not "in
> touch" with the Arabic meaning of the Qur'an, ahadith, etc. So, the majority
> of muslims have lost the language of the revelation they follow acc to your
> logic.
I have not lost the meaning.
> <<The Qur'an does not bypass anything. It is a revlation from God. You are
> <<bypassing that.
>
> And the Psalms are a revelation also acc to Islam. How do we explain that
> ALL MUSLIMS are out of touch with the language they were written in?????
They aren't. That doesn't mean they cannot be in touch with the Qur'an. we have
the qur'an.
> <<The Qur'an is not a "book" it is speech.
>
> Let us not split hairs here. The Qur'an is a book of text that was once
> spoken.
So is shakspear. It is not splititng hairs to require the Qur'an be studied as
oral tradition. It is error to not do so.
> <<We have the Qur'an. You do not have the words of Jesus.
>
> Actually, the apocryphal texts do quote Jesus, as the ahadith quote Muhammad.
Not in Aramaic.
> <<No you are not. You are arguing against Islam and I will reject your
> arguments
> <<as long as you continue to make false statements.
>
> You remind me of a character in the movie Dumb and Dumber who, when
> he didn't want to hear something, stuck his fingers in his ears and repeated
> the phrase "La la la la la" until the speaker stopped.
>
Yes indeed. If you lie about Islam I will seize the simplest possible route to
exposing you.
Omar
> -Salam
Iftikhar
>Most Christians believe Jesus to be THE prophet of God; the
>most important Prophet. That's all.
I guess my next question is do you pray to God directly or do you pray
through Jesus (pbuh) ?
AerisD
Omar wrote:
<snip>
>> touch" with the Arabic meaning of the Qur'an, ahadith, etc. So, the
majority
>> of muslims have lost the language of the revelation they follow acc to your
>> logic.
>I have not lost the meaning.
Why is it when you're faced with a contradiction of your previous statement,
your squirm into an irrelevant comment about your own status/experience?
The issue is the community-at-large -- not YOU. Back to the issue -- the
majority of muslims are, by your own logic, out of touch with the language of
the revelation they follow.
<snip>
>> And the Psalms are a revelation also acc to Islam. How do we explain that
>> ALL MUSLIMS are out of touch with the language they were written in?????
>They aren't. That doesn't mean they cannot be in touch with the Qur'an. we
>have the qur'an.
That's not the point, Omar. I'd find it almost an insult to Allah to be so
blatantly disregarding text that is sacred in my religion. The Qur'an isn't
all there is acc to Islam. Why are asserting that it is? Perhaps you're not
sure what to do with the text not in Arabic -- the text that would show a link
with Judaism/Christianity.
>So is shakspear. It is not splititng hairs to require the Qur'an be studied
as
>oral tradition. It is error to not do so.
Again, you try to pull us off track here. All those who study Islam, Arab
culture know that the Qur'an developed within an oral tradition. But, thanks
for the reminder. Actually, this reminder sheds light on the fact that
Muhammad's
status as an illiterate man is really much less significant than muslims make
it out to be.
<snip>
>> You remind me of a character in the movie Dumb and Dumber who, when
>> he didn't want to hear something, stuck his fingers in his ears and repeated
>> the phrase "La la la la la" until the speaker stopped.
>
>Yes indeed. If you lie about Islam I will seize the simplest possible route
to
>exposing you.
LIE ??!!! Omar, get a grip. Please take more courses in Islamic studies so
you can BEGIN to understand the difference between a lie and a discussion.
I know it will be hard, because while you're sitting at the edge of your
chair waiting for someone to say something about islam you don' t like your
brain can't spare the synapses that would allow you to actually benefit from
discussion.
-Salam
Iftikhar
--
Iftikhar I. Barrie
External Contractor
Systems and Database Administration
Read about ISLAM ...
World Islamic Propagation Centre -> http://www.virtual-pc.com/wipecrc/
Islam, Christianity, and Science -> http://www.maxinet.com/yusuf/yusuf.htm
What they say about Islam ->
http://funnelweb.utcc.utk.edu/~eljazzar/personal/Islam/what-they-say-about-i
slam.html
The Islam Page -> http://www.wam.umd.edu/~ibrahim/
The Arabic Paper -> http://www.flash.net/~royal/islam.html
Search the Quran and Hadith ->
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/reference.html
It is the Truth ! -> http://www.it-is-truth.org
AerisD wrote in message <19971225023...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
>Omar wrote:
><<Arabic speakers are not mixed up. Christians are. You have lost the
><<language of the revelation you follow.
>
>Excuse me, but the VAST majority of muslims are not Arabic speakers,
>and often CANNOT EVEN PRONOUNCE the Arabic words/phrases
>correctly, let alone understand them in their full meaning. They are not
"in
>touch" with the Arabic meaning of the Qur'an, ahadith, etc. So, the
majority
>of muslims have lost the language of the revelation they follow acc to your
>logic.
Even though the VAST number of Muslims are not Arabs, the scholars in those
nations have mastered the Arabic language and are in a position to explain
the Quran in their own language. BTW all Muslims pray in Arabic, the
language of the Quran, and hence are very much in touch with the Arabic
language. The most important point you seem to forget is that the Quran is
still in it's original form as God promised, unlike the Bible, which has
been distorted to the point where in present times even various Christian
denominations have started to delete items from it, such as Jesus (pbuh)
being the Son. Obviously the translations of the Quran may vary slightly,
but the variation is insignificant. You don't believe me ? Study the Quran
on-line at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/reference.html and see for
yourself.
Christians use the translations of the Bible as a source of authority. Which
does not work ! BTW the versions of the Bible are as follows:
*New International Version (NIV)
*New American Standard Bible (NASB)
*Revised Standard Version (RSV)
*King James Version (KJV)
*American Standard Version (ASV)
*Darby Translation
*Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
And the above is only in the West. How many "versions" of the Bible exist in
places like the Soviet Union or Bulgaria ? And you are comparing these
translations with the Quran, which is still, and it will always be, in it's
original form ? No wonder you people refuse to debate Muslims scholars of
the Bible ! You have nothing to stand on !
The Quran is the Word of Allah and there is no mistake in it. Allah Himself
challenges people like you to prove Him wrong. With current Islam bashing
going on in the media one would think that you people would have come up
with an answer. Well let me tell you that the Quran has been around for over
1400 years and no one has been able to prove it wrong and they will never be
able to. On the contrary, the Quran has provided proof that science is
correct. What has the Bible done ?! I can tell you about some of the stories
I have read in the Bible, and I can put them on here for everyone to see,
but I believe they do not belong in this newsgroup. All this is a result of
man's tampering.
<<The Qur'an does not bypass anything. It is a revlation from God. You are
><<bypassing that.
>
>And the Psalms are a revelation also acc to Islam. How do we explain that
>ALL MUSLIMS are out of touch with the language they were written in?????
Again Muslims pray in Arabic and are not out of touch with Arabic language.
>
><<The Qur'an is not a "book" it is speech.
>
>Let us not split hairs here. The Qur'an is a book of text that was once
>spoken.
>
><<We have the Qur'an. You do not have the words of Jesus.
>
>Actually, the apocryphal texts do quote Jesus, as the ahadith quote
Muhammad.
But you do not have, and you never will have, the text [quoting Jesus] in
it's original form. Jesus nor his Disciples never commited anything to
writing. BTW the Hadith plays a secondary role with respect to the Quran.
With respect to the hadith, there is a definite chain of narrators that can
be confirmed. This in itself is a science. Do you have the same ?
>
><<No you are not. You are arguing against Islam and I will reject your
>arguments
><<as long as you continue to make false statements.
>
>You remind me of a character in the movie Dumb and Dumber who, when
>he didn't want to hear something, stuck his fingers in his ears and
repeated
>the phrase "La la la la la" until the speaker stopped.
I stand with my Muslim brother. Do not make false statements about Islam .
>-Salam
Wa'alaikum
Stephen M. Dodd
janet wrote:
> In article <34A0A4CC...@sdodd.com>, "Stephen M. Dodd"
> <sd...@sdodd.com> write
> >
> >Eggman 64 wrote:
> >
> >> >
> >> > You are correct Zaher. Jesus of Nazareth referred to himself as the
> >> > Son of God, which is misunderstood, for "Son" means "creation." "That"
> >> > which Jesus referred to was the mind and spirit within him which was
> >> > created by the works of the great Creator; the Living God.
> >>
> >> You are very wrong in this part.
> >> This shows that you don't have any understandings about the
> >> time that Jesus lived.
> >> Jesus called God HIS father.
> >
> >You have no idea what Jesus said. It was in another language and it is all
> >mixed up now.
> >
>
> This is not overly helpful.
It is very tough for Christians.
> I do not have the original languages, no.
So you should refrain from telling us what it means. The pronouns and object
words have become confused in the translation. All we know is the scope of all
the things it MIGHT mean.
> But there are those that do: have you any idea of the languages which
> are *required* for entry into the likes of hte Biblicum?
I have graduate degrees in Anthroplogy and Lingustics. I do know what is
reqired and can tell you we don't have the data. I have worked with these
issues all my life.
> We may not have the original texts, but we have many that go back almost
> that far, we, well, the scholars can understand and work with the
> languages...
Scholars cannot invent data. We do not have the words of Jesus. We have news
reports and commentaries long after the events.
> Which is why there has recently been a new version of the Vulgate
> issued.
Allah revaled one thing to Jesus. We do not have this revelation no matter hom
many versions of the commentaries are issued.
On the other hand we have the Qur'an intact. The Qur'an says more about what
jesus said than the Bible.
Omar
> >Omar
> >--
> >-
> >- Stephen M. Dodd
> >- New World Productions
> >- 541 754-7757; http://www.sdodd.com
> >
> >
>
> --
> janet
>
> Whether the angels play only Bach in praising God I am not quite sure;
> I am sure, however, that 'en famille', they play Mozart
> Karl Barth
--
AerisD
<<Even though the VAST number of Muslims are not Arabs, the scholars in those
<<nations have mastered the Arabic language and are in a position to explain
<<the Quran in their own language.
However, if you notice the original post, the concern was with the community
members at large -- not the scholars. So, my point holds true.
<< BTW all Muslims pray in Arabic, the language of the Quran, and hence are
<<very much in touch with the Arabic
NOT!!!! All muslims *verbalize* arabic prayers and phrases. I happen to know
from experience that they do NOT necessarily understand the words they are
uttering, and certainly cannot be considered "in touch with the Arabic." Of
course, to assess that one must understand Arabic himself and have a
diverse enough contact with muslims from a variety of backgrounds.
<< And you are comparing these translations with the Quran, which is still,
<<and it will always be, in it's original form ?
I wonder what you do with the dozens (if not hundreds) of translations of
the Qur'an -- which are what non-Arab muslims are REALLY reading to
interface with islam? I myself have owned over five translations that differ
significantly! It is RARE that a non-Arab muslim is literate in Qur'anic
Arabic
to the extent that he/she reads a Qur'an in Arabic.
<<No wonder you people refuse to debate Muslims scholars of the Bible ! You
<<have nothing to stand on !
What a bigoted statement!
<<The Quran is the Word of Allah and there is no mistake in it.
That's your opinion. Even Muhammad himself admitted during is lifetime that
some ayat were the creation of satan.
<< Allah Himself challenges people like you to prove Him wrong.
That's funny...last time I spoke with him he didn't mention that.
<<Again Muslims pray in Arabic and are not out of touch with Arabic language.
Obviously, then, you don't know what being "in touch" is.
<<I stand with my Muslim brother. Do not make false statements about Islam .
I'm glad I get your blood flowing...
Salam
Rahat Husain change z to s)
On 26 Dec 1997 02:31:47 GMT, aer...@aol.com (AerisD) wrote:
><<Even though the VAST number of Muslims are not Arabs, the scholars in those
><<nations have mastered the Arabic language and are in a position to explain
><<the Quran in their own language.
>
>However, if you notice the original post, the concern was with the community
>members at large -- not the scholars. So, my point holds true.
>
huh?
><< BTW all Muslims pray in Arabic, the language of the Quran, and hence are
><<very much in touch with the Arabic
>
>NOT!!!! All muslims *verbalize* arabic prayers and phrases. I happen to know
>from experience that they do NOT necessarily understand the words they are
>uttering, and certainly cannot be considered "in touch with the Arabic." Of
>course, to assess that one must understand Arabic himself and have a
>diverse enough contact with muslims from a variety of backgrounds.
>
i don't know where you live buddy but where i live (washington d.c.)
it's a step by step program: learn to "verbalize" arabic, finish
quran, learn the true arabic language.
><< And you are comparing these translations with the Quran, which is still,
><<and it will always be, in it's original form ?
>
>I wonder what you do with the dozens (if not hundreds) of translations of
>the Qur'an -- which are what non-Arab muslims are REALLY reading to
>interface with islam? I myself have owned over five translations that differ
>significantly! It is RARE that a non-Arab muslim is literate in Qur'anic
>Arabic
>to the extent that he/she reads a Qur'an in Arabic.
>
translations stay and go but the original Quran is still there.
><<No wonder you people refuse to debate Muslims scholars of the Bible ! You
><<have nothing to stand on !
>
>What a bigoted statement!
>
is it?
><<The Quran is the Word of Allah and there is no mistake in it.
>
>That's your opinion. Even Muhammad himself admitted during is lifetime that
>some ayat were the creation of satan.
>
i don't recall him saying that. do you have any authentic proof.
><< Allah Himself challenges people like you to prove Him wrong.
>
>That's funny...last time I spoke with him he didn't mention that.
>
Maybe you werent talking to HIM.
><<Again Muslims pray in Arabic and are not out of touch with Arabic language.
>
>Obviously, then, you don't know what being "in touch" is.
>
and i suppose you do.
><<I stand with my Muslim brother. Do not make false statements about Islam .
>
>I'm glad I get your blood flowing...
>
>Salam
Get your facts straight buddy. then talk.
Stephen M. Dodd
John McGough wrote:
> Iftikhar said:
>
> I have not read your previous posts. If you do not believe Jesus as God
> or a part of God how do you define his role?
> ___________________________________
>
> First, I wasn't refering to my posts. I didn't make any prior ones in
> this thread. I was refering to others' posts in this thread. I felt a
> few of them explained things very well.
>
> Jesus is NOT seen as God in any Christians' eyes that I personally know
> of. Nor do we feel Jesus was a part of God in the physical sense. His
You are not in alignment with the official doctrine of Christians for nearly
2,000 years. Therefore you are not a Christian. What are you?
Are you Muslim?
Nijjhar, Rajinder
Jesus gave us the perception of God and it is wrong to worship Jesus.
Jesus is to be highly honoured for His knowledge and merciful deeds.
--
Ch. Rajinder Nijjhar, M.Sc.
A Jat of the Greater United Panjab
Retired Senior Lecturer in Metallurgy,
Gnostics are the living christs (satgurus) and NOT Christians, of Living
Allah (Spirit),
http://www.saqnet.co.uk/users/cheapflights/index.htm
http://www.saqnet.co.uk/users/cheapflight/gnostic.htm
AerisD <aer...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19971225155...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> Omar wrote:
> <snip>
> >> touch" with the Arabic meaning of the Qur'an, ahadith, etc. So, the
> majority
> >> of muslims have lost the language of the revelation they follow acc to
your
> >> logic.
>
> >I have not lost the meaning.
>
> Why is it when you're faced with a contradiction of your previous
statement,
> your squirm into an irrelevant comment about your own status/experience?
> The issue is the community-at-large -- not YOU. Back to the issue -- the
> majority of muslims are, by your own logic, out of touch with the
language of
> the revelation they follow.
>
> <snip>
> >> And the Psalms are a revelation also acc to Islam. How do we explain
that
> >> ALL MUSLIMS are out of touch with the language they were written
in?????
>
> >> You remind me of a character in the movie Dumb and Dumber who, when
> >> he didn't want to hear something, stuck his fingers in his ears and
repeated
> >> the phrase "La la la la la" until the speaker stopped.
> >
Sandy Kear
In article <01bd1589$6f954bc0$LocalHost@bargain-travel>, "Nijjhar, Rajinder" <cheapf...@saqnet.co.uk> wrote:
>Jesus gave us the perception of God and it is wrong to worship Jesus.
>Jesus is to be highly honoured for His knowledge and merciful deeds.
>
>
Do you have any idea when that practice started? It's quite apparent that
Jesus' followers didn't worship Jesus.
Sandy
Ghen...@khan.u-net.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 1997 08:51:08 -0600, Zaher Kanafani <zk...@aub.edu.lb> wrote:
[snip]
>--> Muslims
>-->believe in the Gospel and the Bible, but we testify that they have been
>-->changed, specially regarding Jesus.
[A Muslim perspective on the subject of the Gospel ]
Muslims do not believe in the *Bible* but in the Injeel!
What about the Injeel? INJEEL means the "Gospel" or "good news" which Jesus Christ preached during his
short ministry.
The "Gospel" writers often mention that Jesus going about and preaching the Gospel (the INJEEL):
1 "And Jesus went ... preaching the GOSPEL ... and healing
every disease among the people." (Matthew 9:35)
2 "... but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and
the GOSPEL'S, the same shall save it." (Mark 8:35)
3 " ...preached the GOSPEL ..." (Luke 20:1)
The "Gospel" is a frequently-used word, but what Gospel did Jesus preach?
Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus. The
Christians boast about the Gospels according to St. Matthew, according to St. Mark, according to St. Luke and
according to St. John, but there is not a single Gospel "according " to (St.) Jesus himself..!!!
We sincerely believe that everything Christ (pbuh) preached was from God. That was the INJEEL, the good news
and the guidance of God for the chidren of Israel. In his life time Jesus never wrote a single word, nor did
he instruct anyone to do so!
What passes off as the "GOSPELS" today are the works
of anonymous hands..!!
D. Denton
On Sun, 4 Jan 1998 Ghen...@khan.u-net.com wrote:
> [A Muslim perspective on the subject of the Gospel ]
>
> Muslims do not believe in the *Bible* but in the Injeel!
AHA! (grin) I'd been wondering what Zaher was on about with this "true
gospel" biz ... :)
>
> What about the Injeel? INJEEL means the "Gospel" or "good news" which Jesus Christ preached during his
> short ministry.
> The "Gospel" writers often mention that Jesus going about and preaching the Gospel (the INJEEL):
>
> 1 "And Jesus went ... preaching the GOSPEL ... and healing
> every disease among the people." (Matthew 9:35)
>
> 2 "... but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and
> the GOSPEL'S, the same shall save it." (Mark 8:35)
>
> 3 " ...preached the GOSPEL ..." (Luke 20:1)
So, then, the term "Injeel" does not refer to a specific document(s) but
rather to the teachings of Jesus as a whole, do I have that correct?
>
> The "Gospel" is a frequently-used word, but what Gospel did Jesus preach?
> Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus. The
> Christians boast about the Gospels according to St. Matthew, according to St. Mark, according to St. Luke and
> according to St. John, but there is not a single Gospel "according " to (St.) Jesus himself..!!!
Minor quibble #1: Personally, I regard the Gospels as an object of
gratitude rather than something to boast of. :)
Minor quibble #2: Obviously Jesus couldn't be a "saint" if, as Christians
believe, he was in fact God Incarnate.
(The above is simply noted in passing rather than to start a whole
'nother debate; we've been there and done that. So now that I have that
out of my system ...) :)
Bear in mind that the accounts come from those who knew Jesus and
participated in his ministry. The remainder of the NT deals with such
things as the history and founding of the early Church (Acts), commentary
and application of the Gospel in specific teachings (Paul's epistles) and
one book of prophecy (Revelation).
> We sincerely believe that everything Christ (pbuh) preached was from God. That was the INJEEL, the good news
> and the guidance of God for the chidren of Israel.
Amen. And everyone else, to boot.
In his life time Jesus never wrote a single word, nor did
> he instruct anyone to do so!
And your point would be ...?
> What passes off as the "GOSPELS" today are the works
> of anonymous hands..!!
Well, that's not a factual statement, since their authors are attested to
(and you yourself referred to them above). :)
Have a Koran handy for when I need to check your statements, so one more
question: Does the Koran then contain the words of Jesus by revelation
direct from God (bypassing the necessity for witnesses) or the testimony
of witnesses of His teachings? I've brought this up before and gotten a
couple of different answers.
Good post.
pokoj s tebou
deezer
Derek M. Denton |"You go outside. You see the Holy Spirit
dee...@u.washington.edu | burning in your trees
Rock & Roll Boy Scout & | and walk on, glowing with the same glow.
Roamin' Cat'lik Slavist | Still you tremble out and in.
| - Innocence Mission, "Brave"
Your_U...@rulfsw.fsw.leidenuniv.nl
Don't you know that when Jesus entered Jerusalem, everybody
worshipped him?
That's just one example....
Your_U...@rulfsw.fsw.leidenuniv.nl
That's just one example....I can give you many more
Stephen M. Dodd
Your_U...@rulfsw.fsw.LeidenUniv.nl wrote:
Excuse me. I thought part of the story was that he had enemies.
You have been reading the inventor Paul and his latter day student Luke again. They were not participants.
oving
Stephen M. Dodd wrote:
>
> Your_U...@rulfsw.fsw.LeidenUniv.nl wrote:
>
> > Sandy Kear wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <01bd1589$6f954bc0$LocalHost@bargain-travel>, "Nijjhar, Rajinder" <cheapf...@saqnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > >Jesus gave us the perception of God and it is wrong to worship Jesus.
> > > >Jesus is to be highly honoured for His knowledge and merciful deeds.
> > >
> > > Do you have any idea when that practice started? It's quite apparent that
> > > Jesus' followers didn't worship Jesus.
> > >
> > > Sandy
> > Have can you make such lame claims?
> > Don't you know that when Jesus entered Jerusalem, everybody
> > worshipped him?
>
> Excuse me. I thought part of the story was that he had enemies.
>
> You have been reading the inventor Paul and his latter day student Luke again. They were not participants.
Ai.
Now you are wrong.
It is written in Matthew 21:1-11
It is written in Mark 11:1-11
It is written in Luke 19:29-44
It is written in John 12:12-19
So it is a fact that it is written in all the 4 Gospels.
And above that: this coming in Jerusalem, the animal used for the King
to ride on, and the sayings of the people are fullfilling of prophecys,
long before these event written, of the Old Testament.
And another thing:
Why is Paul an inventor?
He was a great Hebrew scholar.
So are Hebrews (Jews) great inventors?
You cannot say about sayings: it is an invention, as it is proven to be
things long before his time foretold, and later explained.
You don't believe it, but from the first sentence of the Bible to the
last, the Bible has only one subject: the Word of God, the Messiah, the
Christ which is Jesus, becoming flesh, take the punishment for the sins,
and give back the honour and glory to God, that mankind by disobedience
maded to a shame, by going back to heaven.
It is sure difficult to understand that a book written in such a long
period by so many man has the same subject.
Science cannot understand that.
Religion cannot understand that.
Only faith can understand that.
Stephen M. Dodd
oving wrote:
> Why is Paul an inventor?
He never met jesus. He was a tax collector for Rome. He was rejected by the disciples. You mentioned Luke above. He
was a student of this non-participant in the life of Jesus.
> You don't believe it, but from the first sentence of the Bible to the
> last, the Bible has only one subject: the Word of God, the Messiah, the
> Christ which is Jesus, becoming flesh, take the punishment for the sins,
> and give back the honour and glory to God, that mankind by disobedience
> maded to a shame, by going back to heaven.
You just cited hebrew as a source for your thinking. How come now you disavow the jewish view of Jesus?
> It is sure difficult to understand that a book written in such a long
> period by so many man has the same subject.
There are lots of books with one subject.
Stephen M. Dodd
oving wrote:
> Ai.
> Now you are wrong.
>
> It is written in Matthew 21:1-11
>
> It is written in Mark 11:1-11
>
> It is written in Luke 19:29-44
>
> It is written in John 12:12-19
>
> So it is a fact that it is written in all the 4 Gospels.
Are these men prophets of God?
oving
Stephen M. Dodd wrote:
>
> oving wrote:
>
> > Why is Paul an inventor?
>
> He never met jesus.
He met Jesus on the road to Damascus.
He was a tax collector for Rome.
?? Historical source??
He was rejected by the disciples.
?? Historical source??
You mentioned Luke above.
No, i mentioned all writers of ALL Gospels.
He
> was a student of this non-participant
in the life of Jesus.
Jesus life is eternal.
Jesus took a human form.
Died on the cross for the sins of mankind.
Ressurrect from the dead, He victoried over the death.
Seen by at least 511 man and a few woman.
Gone to heaven.
Seen by Stephanus short before Stephanus died.
Seen by Paul on the road of Damascus.
Seen by John on the isle of Patmos.
So the "life" you are discribing, is the comparing to the life of a
"normal" man/woman.
They can only be seen during the life from that man/woman on earth.
Saul was a hater of Jesus.
And a hater of his followers.
He killed some of them or throwed them in jail.
The only reason why he saw that he was wrong was that he saw Jesus,
resurrected on the way of Damascus.
At that moment he saw the one that he was REALLY hating.
After that point, and the instructions of Jesus, he became a real
follower of him.
Jesus called all the disciples himself, He made the choices.
He called Saul exactly the same way as He called Simon and Andreas, when
they were doing what their job was: fishing.
He called Saul on the way of his job: Saul's job was to crush the
followers of Jesus in the grave.
And what happened?
He became a true disciple.
>
> > You don't believe it, but from the first sentence of the Bible to the
> > last, the Bible has only one subject: the Word of God, the Messiah, the
> > Christ which is Jesus, becoming flesh, take the punishment for the sins,
> > and give back the honour and glory to God, that mankind by disobedience
> > maded to a shame, by going back to heaven.
>
> You just cited hebrew as a source for your thinking. How come now you disavow the jewish view of Jesus?
You know that the Old Testament is part Hebrew, part Aramaic.
You make a statement as "Jewish" view.
That statement is based on the biggest part of the Jews NOW, who rejects
Jesus.
The disciples of Jesus were Jew, most writers of the Bible (Old and New
Testament) are Jew.
So you're argument is a democratic one, a question about HOW MUCH Jews
share the anti-Jesus view.
By that it is just a political view, not a Jewish view.
There were lots of Jews who believed in Jesus, are they not Jew?
There were lots of Jews who believed not in Jesus, are they Jew?
You are not making a solid argument.
Because accepting something has nothing to do with the question Jew/not
Jew.
>
> > It is sure difficult to understand that a book written in such a long
> > period by so many man has the same subject.
>
> There are lots of books with one subject.
But that books are not written in a period of almost 1700 years and
without contradiction in doctrine.
oving
Stephen M. Dodd wrote:
>
> oving wrote:
>
> > Now you are wrong.
> >
> > It is written in Matthew 21:1-11
> >
> > It is written in Mark 11:1-11
> >
> > It is written in Luke 19:29-44
> >
> > It is written in John 12:12-19
> >
> > So it is a fact that it is written in all the 4 Gospels.
>
> Are these men prophets of God?
Ah.
You want the Grand Tour?
Some sidetrack?
Let i remind you, YOU said that LUKE was the one of that story.
I made clear it is in ALL 4 Gospels.
"Are these men prophets of God?" is A NEW question.
"Knowing this first, that (the scope of) no prophecy of scriptures is,
had from its own particular interpretation, for prophecy was not ever
uttered by will of man, but holy men of God spake under the power of
Holy Spirit."
"This is a second letter, beloved, I already write to you, in (both)
which I stir up, in the way of putting you in remembrance, your pure
mind, to be mindful of the words spoken before by the holy prophets, and
of the commandment of the Lord and Saviour by your apostles;"
"And account the longsuffering of our Lord to be salvation; according as
our beloved brother Paul also has written to you according to the wisdom
given to him, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them fo these
things; among which some things are hard to be understood, WHICH THE
UNTAUGTH AND ILL-ESTABLISHED WREST, as also the other SCRIPTURES, to
their own destruction."
Amazing that everything is so well described in the Bible.
As well as the term "prophecy".
Amazing that the attacks on the Bible are so exactly described and that
the character of the attacks in present time are the same.
Amazing.
Ross Haight
What a silly idea! Even if one grants for the sake of argument the entry
into Jerusalem story, Yeshua rode in on an ass and was greeted by some as
the Messiah - a concept which bore not the slightest taint of worship of a
man as god. The very idea is the highest blasphemy to a believing Jew (and
Muslim). There was no trace of worship even if this part of the mythos has
any basis in fact - it was a quite contrived (then by Yeshua or later by
apologists) to fit events into OT 'prophecy.'
Your_U...@rulfsw.fsw.LeidenUniv.nl wrote in
>Sandy Kear wrote:
>>
<cheapf...@saqnet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >Jesus gave us the perception of God and it is wrong to worship Jesus.
>>