The difference between Modern Christianity and Islam:
"...so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture..."
Yet the four accounts of the crucifixion do not agree:
"And it was the third hour, and they crucified him." Mark 15.25
"...and about the sixth hour..." John 19:14
Last words on the cross: http://www.rationalchristianity.net/last_words.html
Sign on the cross: http://www.rationalchristianity.net/sign_cross.html
More contradictions: http://atheism.about.com/od/gospelcontradictions/p/Crucifixion.htm
"For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together." Mark 14.56
The four, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John also note that none of the disciples were present but watched from a distance, from afar and that they had all abandoned him and left him alone. Thus it can be concluded that they had no knowledge, only conjecture.
John alone mentions who was at the crucifixion, yet not in agreement with the other three.
They had no knowledge, even the authorities, the priests and the Romans did not know Jesus nor recognized him from the 12 but employed Judas to identify him. They did know who they had crucified. It could have been one disciples who understood Jesus and took up his cross:
"If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me." Matthew 16.24
"...And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me." Matthew 10.38
The 12 were not worthy, nor were the four. Only Simon of Cyrene took up the cross and he was not even considered a disciple.
those who differ therein are full of doubts
And the four accounts confirm this:
"O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?" Matthew 14.31
"O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves...
"How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?" Matthew 16.8-11
Death on the cross is not the covenant of Jesus but the plot by his enemies to discredit him as the Messiah. Anti-Christ are the Jews who deny Jesus as the Messiah, not Islam:
"O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One Allah."
The warning is beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees who have corrupted the message with lies and false teachings including the sacrifices and offerings to pay for sin: "For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward." Jeremiah 7.22-24
"But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice..." Matthew 9.13, 12.7; Hosea 6:6.
Hi Jimmy, and welcome to the forum. :)
Sorry I didn't notice your post earlier or I would have responded to it.
Before discussing details of your post, can I ask if you have ever read the New Testament and the Gospel, and if so do you understand what the primary subject is?
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/
Quote from: jimi on August 24, 2009, 11:45:34 PM
Anti-Christ are the Jews who deny Jesus as the Messiah, not Islam:
From where do you draw that conclusion?
I'm sure you would agree that simply stating something doesn't make it true.
Quote"Anti-Christ are the Jews who deny Jesus as the Messiah, not Islam"
I believe this statement is logical and self-evident; the Jew certainly deny Jesus as the Messiah and are therefore "against" Jesus as the Christ. They curse him and refuse to even mention him name!
On the other hand, Islam acknowledges him as the Messiah.
I have read the New Testament and the Gospel but, I'm sorry, I don't understand the
'primary subject'. The question of 'what is the
primary subject' is perhaps another topic, however; I would like to limit our discussion to the issue of crucifixion in the Christian faith contrasted with these Biblical references and in the context of the verse of the Quran presented above:
"For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6
"...And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." Mark 12.33
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PM
Quote"Anti-Christ are the Jews who deny Jesus as the Messiah, not Islam"
I believe this statement is logical and self-evident;......
Hi Jimi. God isn't about what you believe to be self-evident. Nor about our failed human logic but rather how he expressed Himself through ALL of His prophets and witnesses.
1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?
He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and
the Son. 23
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [(but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also].
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=252.0
Is that easy enough to understand?
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PM....... the Jew certainly deny Jesus as the Messiah and are therefore "against" Jesus as the Christ.
Jews were always waiting for their promised Son:
Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Psa 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
Some didn't recognize Jesus was that promised Son because they were looking for a great king. They got one but He didn't appear the way they expected Him. They recognize the Son of God, they just don't recognize that Jesus is their promised Son.
It seems God may have blinded some to the Gospel:
Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PMThey curse him and refuse to even mention him name!
You are carrying Mohammed's bigotry and hatred against all Jews. Just as I see that Christian Gentiles are different from atheist Gentiles I see regenerate Jews are different that atheist Jews (but I am also called to love atheist Jews).
Can you see your own bigotry? Mohammed is the source:
Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.'" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vtt8V25lGmc
http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ai=214&ar=1463wmv&ak=null
None of the Jews I know would curse Jesus. This may be why:
1Cr 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PM
On the other hand, Islam acknowledges him as the Messiah.
So does Satan. But we are to follow Jesus as He is revealed through His Word.
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PM
I have read the New Testament and the Gospel but, I'm sorry, I don't understand the 'primary subject'. The question of 'what is the primary subject' is perhaps another topic, however; I would like to limit our discussion to the issue of crucifixion in the Christian faith contrasted with these Biblical references and in the context of the verse of the Quran presented above:
Let's do. Would you like to move these questions to that thread?
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=617.0
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PM
"For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; .....
That would be a good insight for a suicide bomber or Jihadist, wouldn't it?
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PM......and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6
A burnt offering that is done as a routine is irrelevant on it's own. Just like repetitive prayers.
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PM
"...And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." Mark 12.33
Indeed. The new covenant we are given can be understood as soon as someone is confident they conform to this:
Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Once we can be confident we love everyone the rest of the law is automatically written on our hearts.
I did a quick run-down of the old and new covenants there too:
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=617.0
Quote from: jimi on August 26, 2009, 08:50:46 PM
"For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6
Hi Jimi.
Some would say that what I am going to say to you is a heresy but nonetheless, it is what came to me after I accused God of not being able to accept the forgiveness of sins without the suffering and death of Christ.
I felt we were in fact better than God because we are told to just forgive. So is our love greater than Gods?
On the contrary!
If we look back at what was going on in the Old Testament Times, we see people everywhere offering up sacrifices to God. Human and animal alike. The Gods were seen to be angry for some reason. God of the wind, God of volcanoes, earthquakes, lightning. God was displeased about something. So religions about various god came into being. God was indeed unknown.
God set apart a nation from out of the world that was intended to restore harmony between mankind and God - for God did indeed desire mercy and not sacrifice!
Jesus is also referred to as the Son of Man. Mankind would not have accepted God without some form of sacrifice. Human and animal sacrifices would still be here to this day. And still are to a degree!
God set Abraham a task. to offer up his son. But God did not really want him to do that. So made a promise
that He would provide the offering Himself. Then came the annual offering of lambs. This may have been to prevent the Jews from going the way of the world. This became known as the Passover.
It was at the time of Passover that Christ was crucified. His death had meaning. For death is the wages of sin. Sin could not hold him, for Christ has no sin of his own account. So He raised again and conquered death. While on the cross, he said something important, "Father, forgive them, because they don't know what they are doing" On the cross not only did Jesus show great love back, but he also obtained forgiveness of sins.
He alone is the perfect sacrifice to God. By it we can come to know the great love that God does indeed have for us.
We might take for granted today how many false religions have been ejected from this world on account of what Christ has done.
God had made mankind in His own Image. God is a Spirit. It is this connection that was lost. Mankind became of just body and soul. All over the world people of just body and soul were, and still are, trying to reach up to God who is spirit, and so have limited knowledge about God. We see this very apparent in the Old Testament. Where there is a confusion about God.
It was Christ that made God properly known.
It is also by way of Christ that union with God can be restored - body - soul and spirit.
God has brought into being a New Covent in Christ based on love - the covenant God wanted at the very beginning , mankind rebelled against Him. If we look at the things Jesus did and taught we see that He is the only way. He lived and taught the one perfect Love. And if we look there can be no greater love than what he did on the cross. In Jesus we see that God has given every reason to love Him, and please Him.
As I get time I'll have a look at the seeming contradictions that might look to be there surrounding the crucifixion. So keep you eyes peeled if you don't get an answer meanwhile.
I hope this has been of some help to you.
God bless.
Quote from: jimi on August 24, 2009, 11:45:34 PM
... Anti-Christ are the Jews who deny Jesus as the Messiah, not Islam:
Jimmi, There are many antichrists. Anyone against Christ is an antichrist.
Islam is different.
It does not teach Christ truly crucified but teaches God cheated by substituting with another.
Islam accuses God of deception. Such is alien to God for in God there is no lie.
Now this is important. Islam teaches that Allah is the god of this world, and the greatest of deceivers.
The bible shows satan is the god of this world, and the Father of lies.
It is through the death, and resurrection of Christ that satan was unlimately defeated. Jesus rebuked Peter in no uncertain terms when Peter tried to talk Jesus out of going to Jerusalem., "Get behind me satan!"
There becomes motive for satan not to want Christ crucified.
It is through Christ's resurrection that unity with god can be made - the outpouring of the holy spirit.
Islam makes denial of that.
The Mecca of Islam sits on 7 hills of Ancient Babylon at around the time of Daniel.
Muhammad told his followers to go out and lie and even to kill. Muhammad also had great appetite for sex.
Muhammad did not live by the commandments of God. A true prophet would have done.
I hope that has been of help.
God bless.
Quote from: Steve on August 28, 2009, 01:42:10 AM
God is a Spirit.
God
has a Spirit.
Exd 31:3 And I have filled him with the spirit
of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship,
1Cr 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple
of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
Quote from: Steve on August 28, 2009, 01:42:10 AMIt is this connection that was lost. Mankind became of just body and soul.
No doubt for many, but not all.
Rom 11:3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. 4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to [the image of] Baal.
Quote from: Steve on August 28, 2009, 01:42:10 AMAll over the world people of just body and soul were, and still are, trying to reach up to God who is spirit, and so have limited knowledge about God. We see this very apparent in the Old Testament. Where there is a confusion about God.
There is always confusion about God by those that are not His. Why pick on the Old Testament Saints?
Quote from: Steve on August 28, 2009, 01:42:10 AM
It was Christ that made God properly known.
Maybe an unfortunate choice of terms. God made Himself "properly known" to His, before He was manifest on earth in the flesh.
Quote from: Steve on August 28, 2009, 02:01:52 AM
Muhammad told his followers to go out and lie and even to kill. Muhammad also had great appetite for sex.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=456.0
Quote from: jimi on August 24, 2009, 11:45:34 PM
The difference between Modern Christianity and Islam:
"...so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture..."
Jimi, What do you believe happened on the cross?
What became of Jesus?
Where was he during, shortly after, and long after that event?
"... So made a promise that He would provide the offering Himself. Then came the annual offering of lambs. This may have been to prevent the Jews from going the way of the world. This became known as the Passover."
What is very important to note is that because God cannot lie He is bound by His promises just as we are. His judgment will come to those who will not turn from sin. Hence His judgment was poured out on Egypt, a nation given plenty of time to turn from their treatment of the Israelites. Even in all this though He did not intend to destroy the righteous along with the wicked and so commanded the Israelites to cover their doorways with the blood of a lamb to signal to God that they were seeking His mercy. This became the Passover. Literally a Passover of God's judgment. This holiday shows first and foremost an act of obedience and willingness to submit to God. Even in all of this His mercy was the ultimate goal.
The connection cannot be lost on anyone who asks for mercy between the Passover and the Crucifixion. The Passover was a shadow of things to come. The Crucifixion is the ultimate Passover. Just like with the Israelites in Egypt the only way to obtain God's mercy is to reach out in submission and accept His mercy. It cannot be bought, bartered, or earned. Just accepted. Why is it so hard to accept a gift? Well that is for each person to figure out on their own. If a single Israelite had decided to try and obtain God's mercy any other way than prescribed their fate would have been the same as any of the Egyptians. Likewise if we try to obtain such a gift another way than prescribed our fate will be grim.
Jhn 10:1 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.
What does the Bible say on the matter of thieves of any kind?
1Cr 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Why does it have to be that way? As I said before. God is bound by His promises. He can't lie. If He says He will provide a way out He will. Being omniscient has the perk of knowing the best way to do it.
But what has to be recognized is that in God's mercy He did what He knew we could not. He robed Himself in flesh, led a sinless life, and offered Himself up as sacrafice for the sins of the world. As I said before. God is bound by His promises. What did He say in regards to sin?
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
So if God in His mercy wanted to keep true to His word someone had to pay the wage. God paid that wage for us. Since He was the only one that could do it. We are limited by our options. Choose salvation and mercy or choose death. If you feel you have led a completely sinless life then go ahead and pursue some other course. But do you want to bet your soul on it? I do not.
God bless
Pete asks what do i think happen to Jesus?
Answer: One of his disciples took up the cross and gave his life knowing that Jesus would raise him back from the dead.
Quote from: jimi on August 28, 2009, 02:32:17 PM
Pete asks what do i think happen to Jesus?
Answer: One of his disciples took up the cross and gave his life knowing that Jesus would raise him back from the dead.
Does the Quran teach that disciple switch? Which surah?
I know what the Quran teaches
didn't happen to Jesus, but what does the Quran teach
did happen to Jesus? What became of Jesus? What was He doing during the crucifixion, and shortly thereafter, and long after?
Please keep this thread on topic.
Let's not abuse the few Muslims - that do muster the courage to login to the forum - with off-topic chat.
Quote from: Peter on August 28, 2009, 03:27:49 PM
Quote from: jimi on August 28, 2009, 02:32:17 PM
Pete asks what do i think happen to Jesus?
Answer: One of his disciples took up the cross and gave his life knowing that Jesus would raise him back from the dead.
Does the Quran teach that disciple switch? Which surah?
I know what the Quran teaches didn't happen to Jesus, but what does the Quran teach did happen to Jesus? What became of Jesus? What was He doing during the crucifixion, and shortly thereafter, and long after?
Far more than conjecture.
Worth reading. Some might find this disturbing. For the Muslim, pray to the God of Abraham.
http://www.bibleplus.org/discoveries/arkintro.htm
Jimi,
What you see as contradictions are nothing of the sort. They just take some further study and understanding of history and culture. One must also know how the gospel accounts were written, when, and why they appear in the form they appear.
I must assume someone read the gospels to Muhommad, because he was illiterate - and I must assume he was not a very smart man or knowledgeable man either, because he came to a very incorrect conclusion that the gospel accounts were contradictory to one another. All it would have taken is a little bit of critical thinking in order to figure out why the gospels appear the way they do (I say this about Muhommad so that you will understand this may not have been the smartest person to trust).
1. The gospel accounts are not written in chronological order.
2. God wanted four gospel accounts in order to get four peoples' perspectives on the event for more information.
3. The gospel accounts were all written many decades after the actual events transpired, and so the disciples were not listing EVERY detail of EVERY event.
4. Because of 1-3, you're going to find that some disciples remembered different things than other disciples, and so if you are to combine all of the facts and details about each event together, you'll find that you simply get more information, not contradictory information.
Example: Let's say that I and three of my friends go to a church. There is a man there named Jesus and He teaches about all kinds of things. We all are interested, so we listen to things he teaches about. Many years later, we all meet up and we say, "Hey, do you remember the time we went to that church where that guy named Jesus taught? Let's write down the parts we remember about it." So we all start writing down the things we remember from back then. When we start comparing what we all wrote down from memory, we notice something that is quite obvious: We all remember different parts of what Jesus taught about that day. One of us remembers Jesus teaching about redemption. One of us remember Jesus teaching about sin and how it traps us. One of us remembers how Jesus taught about love. And one of us remembers how Jesus taught about forgiveness.
We decide to all place our four different accounts of what we remember into a book. The first account is mine, and the second, third and forth accounts are my friends accounts of what happened. If someone were to assume that we all should remember every detail perfectly and that we wrote everything that happened that day down perfectly, they would think, "Well, these guys are liars, because they all say they heard different teachings that day." But someone who understands that all of us remembered different parts of what happened will put all of our accounts together and say, "Oh, wow. I see that each of them remembered a part of what was taught, and by reading them all, I can learn most of what was taught that day rather than only the things that one of them remembers."
The gospels were written very similarly to the situation I just described. God did it for that reason, because God wanted MORE information given about the events of His life here on earth. And He used the parts of the gospel accounts which match each other perfectly as proof that more than one person saw and confirmed what happened. Muhommad is solely responsible for the Koran, and so we only have his view of things, and no one else confirms that Muhommad's accounts are true and that his interpretation of God's will is true. A person just has to simply assume that what he said is true and accept it as truth. What if he was an agent of the devil and didn't even know it? Now Muslims would be duped into believing what he said and Satan would have them trapped in false belief, doing his bidding. At least with the Bible, we have four different people whom are agreeing fully in their message about what Jesus did while He was here and why He did it and what He was teaching and conveying. They confirm each other by their accounts and they are all in agreement if one understands those gospels and their message.
----You stated----
Yet the four accounts of the crucifixion do not agree:
"And it was the third hour, and they crucified him." Mark 15.25
"...and about the sixth hour..." John 19:14
----End of excerpt----
It's important to understand the two ways they would indicate which hour of the day it was back then. And it is also important to understand how translators mess this up when they translate.
In Mark's account we're told that at the "third hour", they crucified him. Hebrews called 6am the 1st hour. And they called 9am the 3rd hour. However, they also would refer to 6am as the "hour six" of the day. In John's account, he says that Pilot handed him over to be crucified at about the "sixth hour". That is probably translated incorrectly. It should say, "hour six", which is 6am. If you go back and look at Jewish tradition, you should find that early in the morning, this ritual took place of setting a prisoner free. 6am is early in the morning, which lines up with what the gospels say.
So, John is saying that at 6am, he remembers Jesus being handed over by Pilot to be crucified. And then Mark says that three hours later, at the "third hour" (i.e. - 9am), Jesus is crucified.
If Muhommad had understand the Hebrew culture, Greek language, and the ways in which they identified what hour of the day it was, he would've picked up on this. The translators of the King James and many other translations simply don't realize they're translating "sixth hour" backward. It's a cultural thing. You need to understand the language and culture back then and the different ways they told time. If a person doesn't understand that, they will translate that incorrectly. Some translations have it correct:
John 19:14 - Weymouth New Translation
It was the day of Preparation for the Passover, about six o'clock in the morning. Then he said to the Jews, "There is your king!"
I would not trust a "non-Jew's" understanding of the Jewish culture and language useage from that time period. Better to trust the Jews on that, not a non-Jew such as Muhommad.
----You stated----
Last words on the cross: http://www.rationalchristianity.net/last_words.html
----end of excerpt----
Remember the example I posted of how people remember different things that happened during the same event? This is exactly what I mean. Some of them remember one thing that Jesus said, and some of the writers remember some other things that Jesus said. We know that Jesus said all of those things on the cross from each and every gospel. Not all of them are going to remember everything Jesus said on the cross perfectly. They did not have a pin and paper, writing down everything he said or writing down everything they saw happening. This is all from their memory, and MANY many years had passed since those events. Tell me, do you remember events from your life perfectly from 20 years ago? Can you quote exactly the same words you and others stated back then, or do you figure you probably won't remember EXACTLY what you and others said, but some of it? You should really consider that. Then you will see that the gospel accounts are not in conflict, but rather recounting different parts of the same events from different persons' memories.
----You stated----
Sign on the cross: http://www.rationalchristianity.net/sign_cross.html
----end of excerpt----
Remember what I posted two posts ago when I gave the example of what happens when four people remember an event from a LONG time ago? They may write down similar things, but they will not all remember it perfectly. The point is that every one of the four gospel writers confirmed that the sign above Jesus' head said, "King of the Jews". It doesn't prove anything if they all remember the sign slightly differently. It just confirms that they're human and do not have a perfect memory of an event that happened probably 40 some odd years ago for them.
----You stated----
More contradictions: http://atheism.about.com/od/gospelcontradictions/p/Crucifixion.htm
----end of excerpt----
These accusations are nothing we haven't seen before. After reading over a many of them, I see that these have been presented for a long time, and I have had to refute them a few times in the past.
What I've found is that all it takes is some careful examination and critical thought or research to show that each one of them is simply a misunderstanding of scripture or culture or what message God is trying to convey.
I, or anyone in here, can probably go down this list and show you how each one of these is simply not being understood correctly, and then they can show how none of them are actual contradictions. If that would please you, then start posting them up, one at a time, and we can all share our knowledge on the subject with you and show you where the atheists got it wrong and how it is not a contradiction.
Have a good day.
Quote2. God wanted four gospel accounts in order to get four peoples' perspectives on the event for more information.
3. The gospel accounts were all written many decades after the actual events transpired, and so the disciples were not listing EVERY detail of EVERY event.
God always works in this manner. Giving us corrobarating evidence so that when we put His words to the test they pass every time. Look into the rest of the NT. All of those books can be reliably dated to the first century and they all testify to the Crucifixion, the Ressurection, the Deity of Jesus, and the triune nature of God. To the second part of the quote above I would love to expound on that by quoting from Craig L. Blomberg, PH.D.
"Acts ends apparently unfinished-Paul is a central figure of the book, and he's under house arrest in Rome. With that the book abruptly halts. What happens to Paul? We don't find out from Acts, probably because the book was written before Paul ws put to death. That means Acts cannot be dated any later than A.D. 62. Having established that, we can then move backward from there. Since Acts is the second of a two-part work, we know the first part-the gospel of Luke incorporates parts of the gospel of Mark, that means Mark is even earlier. If you allow maybe a year for each of those, you end up with Mark written no later than about A.D. 60, maybe even the late 50s. If Jesus was put to death in A.D. 30 or 33, we're talking about a maximum gap of thirty years or so."
So we see that at least two of the four Gospels may have only twenty some odd years between the event and the written record. Now compare this to the biography of Alexander the Great. It was written 300 years later. Yet noone disputes the authenticity of its' record. Another point to make here is that these writings were all written within the lifetime of eyewitnesses who could have written that these things didn't happen. Yet there are no such records. There is no record denying the crucifixion, empty tomb, or teachings on the life of Jesus. Secular records even verify Jesus' miracles.(though they dispute the source of His power they don't dispute the miracle itself)
God bless
Brothers, i just want to add a simple conclusion to this discussion, in a court of law what evidence is greater than an eye witness?2Peter 1:16. Also the koran always draws refrences from the bible, but the bible stands on it's own truth!
God Bless
It is true that an eye witness is a strong support in a case. Even muslims require multiple witnesses to establish fact. Other than the revelation that Muhammad recieved. They seemed fine just accepting his words at face value. Something that really must be considered, for it adds much weight to the Gospel accounts, where are the contemporary refutation? In other words why do we not have first century documents stating that the tomb wasn't empty, or that Jesus was never crucified, or that Jesus never did these miracles? All the contemparies of the authors of the Gospels DO say is that the disciples stole the body, they completely corroborate the crucifixion, and they dispute the power of his miracles, not the miracles themselves. Had they have been able to supply a body they would have. Had they knew what the crucifixion would mean they probably would have not written of it. Had they been able to deny the miracles they would have rather than just attack the origin of the power. These are all things to ponder.
God bless
My original point is the four gospel writers differed because they simply weren't there. The first three wrote that all the disciples abandoned Jesus, even all those who knew him or were even aquainted with Jesus and only watched from a distance. Only John writes that some were there, yet John puts the crucifixion not only at a different time but on a completely different day!
These statements are initially intended to raise doubt about the crucifixion but the whole doctrine of sacrifice to pay for sin is rejected by Jesus, Hosea and Jeremiah: "I desire obediance not sacrifice."
Cephyr 13 gave you the reason why the time is reckoned differently by the KJV translators here.
Quote from: Cephyr13 on September 06, 2009, 12:12:54 PM
----You stated----
Yet the four accounts of the crucifixion do not agree:
"And it was the third hour, and they crucified him." Mark 15.25
"...and about the sixth hour..." John 19:14
----End of excerpt----
It's important to understand the two ways they would indicate which hour of the day it was back then. And it is also important to understand how translators mess this up when they translate.
In Mark's account we're told that at the "third hour", they crucified him. Hebrews called 6am the 1st hour. And they called 9am the 3rd hour. However, they also would refer to 6am as the "hour six" of the day. In John's account, he says that Pilot handed him over to be crucified at about the "sixth hour". That is probably translated incorrectly. It should say, "hour six", which is 6am. If you go back and look at Jewish tradition, you should find that early in the morning, this ritual took place of setting a prisoner free. 6am is early in the morning, which lines up with what the gospels say.
So, John is saying that at 6am, he remembers Jesus being handed over by Pilot to be crucified. And then Mark says that three hours later, at the "third hour" (i.e. - 9am), Jesus is crucified.
If Muhommad had understand the Hebrew culture, Greek language, and the ways in which they identified what hour of the day it was, he would've picked up on this. The translators of the King James and many other translations simply don't realize they're translating "sixth hour" backward. It's a cultural thing. You need to understand the language and culture back then and the different ways they told time. If a person doesn't understand that, they will translate that incorrectly. Some translations have it correct:
John 19:14 - Weymouth New Translation
It was the day of Preparation for the Passover, about six o'clock in the morning. Then he said to the Jews, "There is your king!"
I would not trust a "non-Jew's" understanding of the Jewish culture and language useage from that time period. Better to trust the Jews on that, not a non-Jew such as Muhommad.
While the scriptures do say that Jesus' disciples abandoned Him on the night of His arrest nowhere does it indicate that they did not return to see the outcome. Given Jesus' foretelling of this event it would only make sense that they would return.
The records indicate that the women observed from afar off. Again there is no indication that none of these women did not walk to the cross later. Given that Jesus' death was imminent and they would be in a hurry to get his body entombed before the beginning of Passover it makes sense that they would approach the cross.
As far as these verses go.
Hsa 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
What God desires and what mankind give are two seperate things. God desires for all to be saved. However, God knows that not all people will be. If you read further in Hosea you see that what was desired was far different from what was given.
Mat 9:13 But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
This was Jesus telling the Pharisees what God wanted of them. Again what God wants and what man gives Him is not always the same. Since God's will is that all should come to repentance He can take a situation like the crucifixion and turn it into victory. Which is exactly what He did.
Besides you are wanting to try and discount 4 narratives that agree on the most important details. That Jesus was crucified and that he rose from the dead. Secular history records the crucifixion.
The earliest non-Christian reference to the crucifixion is likely from Mara Bar-Serapion, a Syriac writer who refers only to a "wise King" executed by the Jews.[36] Roman historian Tacitus, in his Annals (c. A.D. 116), mentions only in passing that "Christus...suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators..."[37] Similarly, Greek satirist Lucian refers to Jesus only as "the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account."[38]
Additionally, first-century Jewish historian Josephus (in a disputed passage[39]) records:
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
—Josephus , Antiquities of the Jews - XVIII, 3:8-10
Though parts of this passage are believed to be interpolation by later editors what is left undoubtedly when those are removed is that a man named Jesus was crucified under Pilate.
Another possible Jewish reference to the crucifixion ("hanging" cf. Luk 23:39; Gal 3:13) is found in the Babylonian Talmud:
On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!
—Soncino English Translation of the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a
Your assertion that none of the Gospels could be accurate because none of the writers were their is amazing considering you want to take the word of a man who was born 6 hundred years after the fact. Not a single person ever witnessed his so called revelation so to insist the correction came from God relies soley on the witness of the same man.
On Jesus' last words this is recorded.
"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."[Luke 23:34]
"Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."[Luke 23:43]
"Woman, behold, your son!" [John 19:25-27]
"E?li, E?li, la?ma sa?bach?tha?ni?" [Matthew 27:46] [Mark 15:34] (Aramaic for "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?")
"I thirst."[John 19:28]
"It is finished."[John 19:30]
"Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!"[Luke 23:46]
All short utterances easily fit within a three hour period. The gospel writers simply wrote the parts that they remembered or the parts others present at the crucifixion remembered. ALL of them still agree on who was on the cross and the fact that He rose from the dead.
More secular evidence for the Gospel accounts are found when one turns to the darkness described. Thallus, Tertullian, and Phlegon all give accounts of the darkness. Phlegon even records the year it happened. The 202nd Olymiad (33AD).
But more to the point the verse in the koran suggests that people were conjecturing on who was crucified. NOONE had any doubts. Not the Jewish leaders, not the 1st century Christians, and not any true Christian today. However, many opinions have been given by muslims as to who was on the cross and what transpired.
1.Judas had Jesus' face put on him.
2.Some random person was made to look like Jesus.
3.Your own theory of substitution by one of the disciples.
The list still continues. It would seem that the conjecture lies with the muslim community my friend.
God bless
Jesus was not crucified. Early Christians did not accept the crucifixion of Jesus and Jews denied Jesus as the Messiah because of this false teaching. Here is the evidence:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m4KW-dysKk
QuoteEarly Christians did not accept the crucifixion of Jesus
As has been pointed out in the above posts the earliest record of first century Christianity is the Epistles, Acts of the apostles, and Gospels. All of these sources state emphatically that Jesus was crucified and conquered death by resurrecting on the third day. Furthermore even if the above quote were true it still suggests that they were in agreement thereby undermining Muhammad's "revelation" that they had only conjectures.
QuoteJews denied Jesus as the Messiah because of this false teaching
What false teaching? That Jesus was crucified? That He wasn't?
If you are suggesting that they rejected Jesus as the Messiah because the Christians claimed He had not been crucified then two problems arise with your argument. 1. You are calling the teaching of Him not being crucified false effectively deflating your point of view. 2. The fact that He was crucified put the death knell in many of them accepting Jesus as the Messiah, because the very fact that He suffered death proved to them He couldn't be the Messiah. A claim they still use today. So they had no problem agreeing that He had indeed been crucified.
2. If you are suggesting that the Jews didn't accept Him as the Messiah because the Christians taught He was crucified then they would agree. Problem is you stated that the early Christians didn't accept that view. Your post needs some clarity. As it is contradictory in nature.
As for your evidence someone else will have to address the youtube video as I have dial up and cannot view youtube videos.
Quote from: jimi on August 28, 2009, 02:32:17 PM
Pete asks what do i think happen to Jesus?
Answer: One of his disciples took up the cross and gave his life knowing that Jesus would raise him back from the dead.
1. Where does Mohammed say this in the Quran? Where did you learn that from?
2. Why would Jesus do that when He could be the one raised from the dead?
Quote from: jimi on September 20, 2009, 11:26:01 PM
Jesus was not crucified. Early Christians did not accept the crucifixion of Jesus and Jews denied Jesus as the Messiah because of this false teaching. Here is the evidence:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m4KW-dysKk
I explore another video done by that foolish old deceiver Dirks on the Deen show here
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=488.0
Jimi, the simple fact of the matter is that over the entire 2,000 years of Christianity there has never been such a thing as a Christian that didn't believe Jesus sacrificed Himself to save all who believe in His shed blood from sin. If someone didn't believe that they wouldn't be a Christian - simple as that.
The Gospel, which means "Good News" or "glad tidings" is the news that Jesus gave Himself on the cross so we could be saved. It is what the Gospel IS.
Do you believe that the first drop of blood shed by a Muslim so-called "martyr" may provide propitiation for the sin of 70 of his nearest and dearest friends and relatives?
Dr. Dirks refers to several early Christians who rejected the crucifixion and mentions verses from the Apocrypha including
The Apocalypse of Peter and
The Acts of John:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/actsjohn.html
I think these are proofs that there is evidence in the historical record that Jesus was not crucified and that several early Christian congregations rejected the crucifixion.
QuoteWhat false teaching? That Jesus was crucified? That He wasn't?
It is clear that the crucifixion is a false teaching according to the Biblical verses I mentioned earlier, also the fact that the Jews believe that the Messiah will not be killed. Because modern Christians contend that the Messiah was killed, the Jews reject Jesus Christ.
QuoteThe Gospel, which means "Good News" or "glad tidings" is the news that Jesus gave Himself on the cross so we could be saved. It is what the Gospel IS.
The 'good news' of the Gospel is the Kingdom of God that few were able to understand: "Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given... they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand." Matthew 13.11,13
QuoteIt is clear that the crucifixion is a false teaching according to the Biblical verses I mentioned earlier
What biblical verses? The Apocalypse of Peter? The Acts of John? The irony is you discount the Gospels, Acts and Revelation though all have been dated to the first century yet you want to support your theory with writings that came in the second or third centuries, or even later. They don't even come close to the earliest records we have. Again your opinion is based on people writing hundreds of years after the fact. Furthermore all of those writings completely ignore the secular records which date to the first century validating the crucifixion.
Quotealso the fact that the Jews believe that the Messiah will not be killed
This is the views of the Jews that did not have ears to hear. Which you unwittingly referenced from Matthew 13. Those Jews ignored all of the OT scriptures that mentioned His death. One of the most prominent one being Daniel. They emphasized the conquering Saviour half of His ministry so much that they rejected the half mentioning His death and ressurection.
Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall
Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Psa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
The point is rejection of Jesus' sacrafice for the sins of many is rejecting the only way to be saved from the wrath of God as we are all deserving of His judgement as sinners.
Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Again fortold in the OT.
Isa 53:12 Therefore will I divide him [a portion] with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
God bless
Indeed. From many hundreds of years before Jesus was revealed to us.
Psalms 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. 17 I may tell all my bones: they look [and] stare upon me. 18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
"That day" is considerably different than Mohammed taught
Zechariah 12:9 And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. 10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for [his] only [son], and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for [his] firstborn.
Quote from: resistingrexmundi on September 22, 2009, 12:51:00 PM
What biblical verses?...
These Biblical verses:
Quote from: jimi on September 10, 2009, 10:21:36 PM
For I spake not... concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God..."
Jeremiah 7.22-24
Quote from: jimi on September 10, 2009, 10:21:36 PM
"I desire obediance not sacrifice."
Matthew 9.13, 12.7; Hosea 6:6
The verses in Jeremiah and Hosea speak of the spirit of the Law. Which is a penatent heart turned toward God. Jesus was pointing this out to the pharisees as they taught salvation through adherence to the Law yet neglected the intent of the heart. And as I have already pointed out, and what can be witnessed in our everyday life, that what God desires and what we, as fallen creatures, give Him are not always the same. God does indeed desire mercy and not sacrafice. God is merciful and just. As a just God He must abide by His word.
Exd 10:17 Now therefore forgive, I pray thee, my sin only this once, and intreat the LORD your God, that he may take away from me this death only.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
God has to keep His word. He told Adam and Eve that should they disobey Him they would die. They did and as a result a death sentence was passed. God in His mercy decided to reconcile man to Him by making the atonement for sin. He robed Himself in flesh and recieved the penalty of death for us.
Jhn 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jhn 1:14 ¶ And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
God does not desire for us to sacrifice because He has mercy on us, and likewise we are to have mercy towards one another. The major point you are missing is that Jesus' death on the cross IS the mercy of God. The pharisees weren't offering Jesus as a sacrafice. Jesus was offering Himself by laying down His life for all that would recieve God's salvation.
Jhn 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
Mat 5:7 Blessed [are] the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Luk 6:36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
And should we keep His commandments to love Him with all our heart, and to love one another as we love ourselves we will be rewarded for our mercy.
Hbr 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
Only if we accept God's mercy through Jesus can we obtain mercy.
God bless
"The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin."
Deuteronomy 24.16
That verse is a levitical code for the priest to use in matters of civil cases. It is instructing the priests to not pass judgment on the son for the sins of the father. Jesus as God was not passing judgement on Himself because He was guiltless and without sin. He was offering Himself as an atonement, not as a judgement. You are making the same mistake that the pharisees made and try to use the letter of the Law to anull the spirit of the Law.
Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.
Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Hbr 10:18 Now where remission of these [is, there is] no more offering for sin.
Jesus was not judged to be guilty of His fathers sin, no more than any offering given up to God in the OT was guilty of anything. In fact the passover lamb was still young and unblemished expressing its' innocence.
God bless
That verse has nothing to do with sacrifice:
"I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people...
"Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood. And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust. For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off."
Leviticus 10,12-14
These verses refer to the consumption of blood! You are making the mistake not me; these verses have nothing to do with the 'spirit' of the Law:
Quote from: resistingrexmundi on September 23, 2009, 11:58:54 AM
You ...try to use the letter of the Law to anull the spirit of the Law.
Have you anulled the letter of this law too? And does that mean you are therefore cut off? "Cut off" is very serious, it means like you are out of touch, discarded or exiled. I think thats what happens to people who don't follow Gods Law and its quite obvious when you start to accuse me of anulling the Law that you yourself don't even follow.
Do you resistingrexmundi? Can you really accuse me of anulling the law?
Quote from: jimi on September 28, 2009, 10:04:47 PM
Can you really accuse me of anulling the law?
Are you a Jew whom God made that covanant with in the first place?
Are you suggesting that you follow the 613 Mosaic laws?
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Act&c=10&v=14&t=KJV#10
James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.
Certainly Mohammed didn't follow any law of any kind, including those of civil society. He murdered people, plundered caravans, fornicated with concubines, and even devoted a whole chapter in the quran detailing the disposition of property that Muslims steal from others, including Mohammed's 1/5 share (like a Mafia Don) - 8 - AL-ANFAL (SPOILS OF WAR, BOOTY)
Jimi, you are loosing the big picture by trying to get lost in details. Do you really think God would nullify the 1600 year record of His word, delivered through
all of the prophets and apostles, that God's people have followed for 3500 years through two covenants - with the
unwitnessed testimony of
a single, 7th century murdering thief, who was and taught the exact opposite of Jesus Christ?
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=336.0
1Cr 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor
thieves, nor
covetous, nor drunkards, nor
revilers, nor
extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
So where does that put Mohammed, jimi?
Let's start with Mohammed's caravan plundering. Can you deny that you follow a thief?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vchc7lOrZWk&feature=PlayList&p=8266054CD6D3748D&index=0&playnext=1
Jimi please let me ask you a question.
If God wanted to reveal Himself to us as a man in the flesh and walk among us, could He?
QuoteThat verse has nothing to do with sacrifice:
Really? Huh...well enlighten me...what is an altar used for?
Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls:
for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul. The broader point being made in the surrounding verses show that the life of the flesh is blood and was meant to be given as an ATONEMENT FOR THE SOUL. Jesus' shed blood was the only blood acceptable for the atonement of every soul from then to perpetuity. As He stated in the verse I offered next.
Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament,
which is shed for many for the remission of sins. And I am not accusing you of anything. You are accusing yourself by proof texting verses to fit your warped view of atonement and Jesus' salvation.
Quote"Cut off" is very serious, it means like you are out of touch, discarded or exiled.
Actually this term means killed. Another verse in which it is used in such manner is this one.
Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall
Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
And look at that. We are full circle right back to the Messiah being killed for others sake. Not his own.
QuoteI think thats what happens to people who don't follow Gods Law and its quite obvious when you start to accuse me of anulling the Law that you yourself don't even follow
Here inlies the problem with Islam. It teaches nearly nothing with assurity. Muhammad didn't even know if he was going to heaven.http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=580.0 here is a link discussing that matter. And I KNOW for a fact that I follow the law of God. You want to know how?
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mat 22:36 Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
Mat 22:39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
All who have accepted Jesus' gift of salvation are saved by grace through faith. We are to love God with all our hearts and love one another as ourselves. In these two commandments we are keeping the spirit of the law. Rigid punishment and a legalistic approach to the application of law do nothing to treat the root of the problem.
"...And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: and to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices."
Mark 12.33-34
Quote from: jimi on September 29, 2009, 11:11:55 PM
"...And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: and to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices."
Mark 12.33-34
That's right jimi, as your verse begins there is but one God. "...for there is one God; and there is none other but he..."
1Jo 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and
these three are one.
God revealed Himself to us through Jesus Christ - the Word made flesh. Even you believe Jesus was sin free. How could just another prophet, or any man on earth, be sin free?
The mediator of the new covenant:
Hbr 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than [that of] Abel.
He became that one sacrifice for all:
Hebrews 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
Our only mediator:
1Ti 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
And when we can truly love
everyone just as ourselves, the rest of the law falls neatly into place.
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Thanks Pete but I'm still waiting for resistingexmundi to respond:
Quote from: jimi on September 29, 2009, 11:11:55 PM
"...is MORE than ALL whole burnt offerings and sacrifices."
Mark 12.33-34
Quote from: resistingrexmundi on September 29, 2009, 06:15:10 AM
And look at that. We are full circle right back to the Messiah...
Right back to my original point that obediance is more than all offerings and sacrifice; that the crucifixion is not the main message of the Bible but obeying the Word of God is: "Go learn what this means, 'I desire mercy and not sacrifice.'"
Quote from: jimi on October 05, 2009, 12:15:12 PM
Thanks Pete but I'm still waiting for resistingexmundi to respond:
But you didn't respond to my posts. Please forgive me if you are still working on them.
Quote from: jimi on October 05, 2009, 12:15:12 PM
Quote from: jimi on September 29, 2009, 11:11:55 PM
"...is MORE than ALL whole burnt offerings and sacrifices."
Mark 12.33-34
Quote from: resistingrexmundi on September 29, 2009, 06:15:10 AM
And look at that. We are full circle right back to the Messiah...
Right back to my original point that obediance is more than all offerings and sacrifice; that the crucifixion is not the main message of the Bible but obeying the Word of God is: "Go learn what this means, 'I desire mercy and not sacrifice.'"
It says that to love God and to love our neighbors as ourselves is more than whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. Does the Gospel suggest that is sufficient for salvation, or did the verse you proof texted simply begin to clarify the relative importance of things? How can we love God? By doing His will as revealed through His Word.
Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation
through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Unless you never committed a sin, jimi, you need to be washed or you will die in your sins.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Divorcing a verse from it's context in a failed effort to pretend the Gospel offers any support whatsoever for the false prophet Mohammed's 7th century religion, will only continue to keep you condemned. Particularly since Mohammed's is a
stand-alone religion that is the
exact opposite of the Gospel. To follow Mohammed's 23 year record you must reject the 1600 year record of Word of God, as revealed through
all of the prophets and witnesses, that His people have followed for 3500 years.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=148.0
Let me ask you again jimi:
1. If God wanted to reveal Himself to us as a man in the flesh and walk among us, could He? If God wanted to do that, and buy the house next door to you and move in, could He, if He so chose to do so?
2. And let me also ask again, can you deny that you follow a thief?
Quote from: Peter on October 05, 2009, 01:55:40 PM
Let me ask you again jimi:
1. If God wanted to reveal Himself to us as a man in the flesh and walk among us, could He? If God wanted to do that, and buy the house next door to you and move in, could He, if He so chose to do so?
2. And let me also ask again, can you deny that you follow a thief?
1. No.
2. Yes.
Quote from: jimi on October 06, 2009, 12:09:06 PM
Quote from: Peter on October 05, 2009, 01:55:40 PM
Let me ask you again jimi:
1. If God wanted to reveal Himself to us as a man in the flesh and walk among us, could He? If God wanted to do that, and buy the house next door to you and move in, could He, if He so chose to do so?
2. And let me also ask again, can you deny that you follow a thief?
1. No.
2. Yes.
Then by your first answer you deny that God is all powerful. He manifested Himself many ways throughout history. As a burning bush, as a cloud, as a pillar of fire, etc. You have essentially relegated God to what your mind can fit around. Trying to finitely explain the infinite.
And as for your second response. I suppose you could deny that you follow a theif. But it is a denial of islamic history as related through the hadiths and the koran. A whole chapter in the koran is on the spoils of war or booty. Stealing is stealing. The Bible takes a strong stance on this issue. Even to the point of condemning the act of coveting in your heart. Muhammad stole. Period. Instead of admitting it and asking for forgiveness he instead made justifications for his lewd and base behaviour by declaring it fit so long as you do so against those who don't follow islam. Muhammad stole possesions, wives, lives, and probably the most disgusting, the innocence of a nine year old girl. He is every bit the theif in action and coveteousness.
Quote from: jimi on October 06, 2009, 12:09:06 PM
Quote from: Peter on October 05, 2009, 01:55:40 PM
Let me ask you again jimi:
1. If God wanted to reveal Himself to us as a man in the flesh and walk among us, could He? If God wanted to do that, and buy the house next door to you and move in, could He, if He so chose to do so?
2. And let me also ask again, can you deny that you follow a thief?
1. No.
That's quite a sad admission regarding your "Allah".
I'm glad my God is without limit. Particularly without the limits of the imagination of a single 7th century desert dwelling illiterate.
Quote from: jimi on October 06, 2009, 12:09:06 PM
2. Yes.
Come on jimi. Either you've never read the Quran, or you're being dishonest. There is a whole chapter titled
8 - AL-ANFAL (SPOILS OF WAR, BOOTY)
That even details Mohammed's 1/5 share - just like a Mafia Don - of the property stolen from others.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/008.qmt.html
That property even including capturing and sexually enslaving girls and women - married and unmarried - as part of the spoils of war. Even including instruction regarding pimping out one's sex slaves as prostitutes.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=456.0
1Cr 6:9 Know ye not that
the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived:
neither fornicators, nor
idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor
thieves, nor
covetous, nor drunkards, nor
revilers, nor
extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
The Islamic First Jihad imperialistic slaughter and theft reached all the way up to France and Austria.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=battle+of+tours&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-701
Did you ever ask yourself
how you would like it if a band of thieves came to your property, stole all your livestock, broke down the door to your house and stole everything you worked all your life for, and kidnapped and pressed your 9 year old daughter and wife into sexual slavery?
Do you really believe that could possibly be of God?
http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/islam-slavery-and-rape/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJhSejBDTPI
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=islam+sexual+slavery&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-701
Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
John 13:35 By this shall all [men] know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
Pete,
You assume too much.
Expound. Enlighten us jimi.
i don't find these questions relevant to this topic.
lets start another: Manifestation of God (http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=732.0)
What we can find relevant to this subject, is that when it comes to the death of Jesus Christ, Muslims wind up being the ones that are just as Mohammed described Jews and Christians.
While Mohammed filled Muslims with complete resolve as to what not to believe, he left a complete vacuum as to what they are to believe, when it comes to who was crucified. Thus Islam emerges to Christianity, as the negative does, to a photograph. Islam is the only anti-another-religion, religion. Indeed Islam is antichrist.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=252.0
When we ask Muslims who was crucified we find they are "...full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow...". Indeed Muslims provide nearly as many different answers, as Muslims that we ask, and ALL answers are purely conjecture. Isn't that ironic?
Visit the following link to view just a few, of the vast array of wild guesses that Muslims have created, over the years.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=628.0
It's important for Muslims to understand that Muhammad declared the EXACT OPPOSITE of the WHOLE SUBJECT of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Just as Muhammad and his follower's personal behavior was the EXACT OPPOSITE of that of the sinless Messiah.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2573.0
Muhammad's declaration that Jesus was not crucified was apparently delivered to him by his wife Khadijah's cousin Waraqa who was a Gnostic Ebionite occult priest. The Ebionite Gnostics got their doctrine from Simon the Magician, or Sorcerer, who first made the claim in the first century. He was labeled the "father of heresies" by the early church.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2475.0
The crucifixion of the Messiah was prophesied many hundreds of years in advance during the old covenant.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2573.0
While our friend jimi denied it, no honest person can deny that - according to Islam's own books - Muhammad is revealed as an imperialistic conquering, mass murdering, prisoner abusing, thief.
Even having innocent Jewish farm boys who had just reached puberty, brought before him and beheaded, along with their dads and grandpas, while he and his boys pressed their little sisters, mothers and grandmothers into sexual slavery, and stole all their property with Muhammad getting a 1/5 share, just like a Mafia Don.
http://www.petewaldo.com/banu_qurayza_massacre.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9FYYo5EINU
Do you really want to bet your eternity on a man that is revealed as having had that kind of character, only to be rewarded by the chicken and wine serving bordello, that sprang from the child-like imagination of a 7th century SW Arabian desert dwelling illiterate, that he called "paradise"? Does that sound like the kind of eternal dwelling place that a good God would establish for His people? Isn't it obvious that Muhammad is providing you with a one-way ticket to join the one that he served? That he invented his carnal heaven, to encourage his fellow carnal cutthroat thieves to stay in the game, and even be suicidal in battle?
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=264.0
This even as you reject the blood of the sinless Messiah, the Lamb of God, that He shed to save you?
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/the_lamb_slain.htm