It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is islam the anti christ?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR

Originally posted by The time lord
The only religion that is has blatant Anti-Christ propaganda.


Nope, in Islam, Jesus Christ is one of their recognized prophets. Lots of people don't know that though.

I don't think that Islam is the anti-christ, but I think the corrupt catholic church can make a good case for itself being "the anti-christ" by definition.

Jesus's words are so distorted by the church, and it is infested with corruption.


I know that the origins of Jesus is lowered and his convenant broken in Islam. Everything Jesus warns about is true in the Koran more than another other religion. The type of thing that Satan wanted from Jesus to fail as the King of kings and saviour tag is exactly what Islam wants. All the prophecies are to do with todays Islamic lands and some people are fullfilling it right now.

Yes the Chatholic church was a good counter fit but now I think since people have descoved what the basic teachings of Isalam is about people have a suspicion. The two could join to form a one world government for peace yes. It could happen as the problem action solution trick comes into play of one world religion of coming together. Guess what they want to and are doing so in small porsions. A mixed race Anti-Christ that brings both religions together to form the allies needed to take world control.

People think Jesus from the Bible is the same from the one of Koran he is not. Without the Bible the Koran has no history to support it self or him as an existed person.
The Bible is the most precise historical book it has many translations and copies that show it comes from the same original text than any other book needed for proof to show it has not changed. The only thing changed is us the language. You can not go to the father without believing in the Son, as the Son of God the saviour that is plain and simple.

So a direct denial of Jesus for Allah as a replacement is as Satanically predicted as one could wish for. Jesus has the Old Testiment as evidence of his coming and dead sea scrolls and ancient manuscrips still support the case unless they are also currupt which i doubt.

We can not unite in religion its an invite to Satanism terms. Its a divide and will remain untill the real God shows.


[edit on 15-3-2006 by The time lord]




posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   
I was interested and with you until the third paragraph.

My friend, I can't put it more simpler than this. The Bible is NOT the most historically accurate book out there. Not by a long shot.

What do you think the King James version actually means?

Christianity was used and abused by the powers that be, and indeed the whole organization of it, all through history. If you don't know that, you need to do some serious reading.

Jesus' true teachings are considerably different than what most people are led to beleive.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR

Originally posted by The time lord
The only religion that is has blatant Anti-Christ propaganda.


Nope, in Islam, Jesus Christ is one of their recognized prophets. Lots of people don't know that though.

I don't think that Islam is the anti-christ, but I think the corrupt catholic church can make a good case for itself being "the anti-christ" by definition.

Jesus's words are so distorted by the church, and it is infested with corruption.


It is true that Islam regards Jesus as a prophet and that is where the major self-inconsistency arises in Islam. If you regard Jesus has a prophet, you have to regard something of what He said. Jesus said He is the God, the way, no one comes to the Father but by Him, and there is no other way.

Jesus said enough things like this that, if you regard what He said at all, it is extremely difficult to take only part of those statements. It's really all or nothing. Islam would have been more self-consistent to leave Jesus out of it entirely.

As a matter of Christian theology, anything that is not of Christ is of anti-Christ. If one considers the Greek words for anti-christ, it is clear that the word does not always mean "opposite", but sometimes "instead of". To be anti-Christ, according to the Bible, one only need to teach "another Jesus", not the one who is the true Jesus of the Word. So, yes, Islam is of the anti-christ.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I agree. All it takes to be in the spirit of Antichrist is to teach a fake Christ and a different gospel. Which is what Islam does with the whole prophet who survived to India yarn invented by Muhammed.



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Nakash, Nakash, Nakash!

I really don't know what to say. I know you admitted earlier on that you don't care about the facts, just that you believe that Islam is evil:


Originally posted by Nakash
Again, I don't know what the latest fads in Islam are, but I don't really care if Muhammed called himself the golden goose- the spirit and theology of the religion are on the wrong track.


But c'mon! Really! Read up on it! The Quran can hardly be called a "latest fad of the muslims". It's been around since the beginning of Islam. and it is the Quran that states that Jesus was taken up alive into heaven. It says nothing at all about anyone going to India.

The time lord, aside from the fact that Jesus never acknowledges to being God in the Bible, I felt I should inform you that muslims take the Bible to not be in it's original form, and thus only trustworthy where it agrees with the Quran.



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by The time lord

Originally posted by SteveR

Originally posted by The time lord
The only religion that is has blatant Anti-Christ propaganda.


Nope, in Islam, Jesus Christ is one of their recognized prophets. Lots of people don't know that though.

I don't think that Islam is the anti-christ, but I think the corrupt catholic church can make a good case for itself being "the anti-christ" by definition.

Jesus's words are so distorted by the church, and it is infested with corruption.


I know that the origins of Jesus is lowered and his convenant broken in Islam. Everything Jesus warns about is true in the Koran more than another other religion. The type of thing that Satan wanted from Jesus to fail as the King of kings and saviour tag is exactly what Islam wants. All the prophecies are to do with todays Islamic lands and some people are fullfilling it right now.

Yes the Chatholic church was a good counter fit but now I think since people have descoved what the basic teachings of Isalam is about people have a suspicion. The two could join to form a one world government for peace yes. It could happen as the problem action solution trick comes into play of one world religion of coming together. Guess what they want to and are doing so in small porsions. A mixed race Anti-Christ that brings both religions together to form the allies needed to take world control.

People think Jesus from the Bible is the same from the one of Koran he is not. Without the Bible the Koran has no history to support it self or him as an existed person.
The Bible is the most precise historical book it has many translations and copies that show it comes from the same original text than any other book needed for proof to show it has not changed. The only thing changed is us the language. You can not go to the father without believing in the Son, as the Son of God the saviour that is plain and simple.

So a direct denial of Jesus for Allah as a replacement is as Satanically predicted as one could wish for. Jesus has the Old Testiment as evidence of his coming and dead sea scrolls and ancient manuscrips still support the case unless they are also currupt which i doubt.

We can not unite in religion its an invite to Satanism terms. Its a divide and will remain untill the real God shows.


[edit on 15-3-2006 by The time lord]



I don't understand the reference to the Catholic Church. What do you mean join up? And Why? More importantly is peace between christians and muslims a bad thing?



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 11:21 PM
link   


Jesus never acknowledges to being God in the Bible


OK, you seem to make a big issue about the Muhammed/Elijah thing even though I have seen plenty of Muslims calling Muhammed Elijah, the Mahdi the "holy spirit" and other bizzare concepts yet you are wrong on this one, Jesus Christ clearly said who he was:




Jesus answered, "Don't you know me, Philip, even after
I have been among you such a long time?
Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. ...
Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the
Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the
miracles themselves." (John 14:10-11).

"I am the resurrection and the life.
He who believes in me will live, even though he dies."
(John 11:25)



two of my personal favourite references. I suggest you read this enlightening article:

ourworld.compuserve.com...

Again, I want plenty of Muslim brothers in heaven, not Muslims as cannon fodder for some Satanic world leader with his master's own interest in mind (by this I mean Antichrist, or the 12th Imam of Islam).

[edit on 16-3-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 06:28 AM
link   
What I understood from what NAKASH and Time Lord said is that your only excuse for calling Islam the Antichrist is that Muslims doesn't accept Jesus as their savior , Muslims only consider Jesus as a Prophet and Muslims totally reject the idea of Jesus being a God.

Then tell me : Jews also doesn't consider Jesus as GOD and they also doesn't recognize him as a prophet . Doesn't that make Judaism the Anti-Christ too?

Also Buddhism , Hinduism and all other religions in the world doesn’t worship Jesus , does that make all those religions the Antichrist?

Your logic is twisted , bizarre and hard to swallow. Why on earth Islam is called the Anti-Christ for not worshiping Jesus, while Judaism is in the safe side even though Jews don’t worship Jesus?

At least Muslims give Jesus an honorable position and consider him as a great prophet, while the Jews consider him as false messiah.
Listen to what the Quran said about Jesus:


[3:45] The angels said, "O Mary, GOD gives you good news: a Word from Him whose name is `The Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary. He will be prominent in this life and in the Hereafter, and one of those closest to Me.'
Quran Search



[2:87] We gave Moses the scripture, and subsequent to him we sent other messengers, and we gave Jesus, son of Mary, profound miracles and supported him with the Holy Spirit. Is it not a fact that every time a messenger went to you with anything you disliked, your ego caused you to be arrogant? Some of them you rejected, and some of them you killed.
Quran Search


NAKASH and Time Lord you still live in the dark ages when the church was able to call any group of people that disagree with it the Anti-Christ.



[edit on 17-3-2006 by Deep_Blue]

[edit on 17-3-2006 by Deep_Blue]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Blue, you are correct- all those who attempt to substitute Jesus Christ as he was for something else are antichrist in their beliefs. Doesn't matter who does it- Christian, Budhist, Jewish, Muslim, the definition of Antichrist is in fact "in place of Christ". Also blue, in case you don't know, Protestantism (I follow protestant like theology) brought Europe out of the dark ages, and this happened in part because we replaced the RCC mentality of persecuting all those who disagreed with Christianity, and placed instead a biblical theology in which the personal relation each human being has with God independant of his social postioning is the key, not the superchurch semi-nationalist apparatus ( a mentality still prevalent in Islam, which unsurprisingly still lives in the dark ages). That's what I want all of you to have- a good relationship with God, I myself don't care in the slightest about politics and on what Islam believes in, I just point it out because Islam is attempting to revise Jesus Christ in favour of a view in which Muhammed is the "last prophet" and he is a failed prophet. Muhammed wasn't a prophet, Jesus Christ was, but Jesus Christ was more than a prophet.

[edit on 17-3-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   
The differene between bible, and quran is that bible had been changed throught out time while quran has'nt. I am a muslim and i was never tld to kill any christens or jews. Islam protomes peace, science etc. Yes we too belive in jesus but to us he's a prophet. We also belive that christens and jewisiam, along with islam are "heavenly" religons. In islam we are told to keep peace, even our prophet Mohamaad (PBUH) kept friendship with different tribes.

Sure there are some extermists in islam. Bin laden, iran's priesdent. But you can't judge a whole religon of 1.2 billion by a few people's deeds. A real muslim would tell you that what bin laden did is wrong and same goes for iran's presdient. He say that isreal should be wiped of the map. But why? I don't know why he does'nt want to atleast talk with irealis first and set some sort of deal or something.

And i've seen alot of people say that islam is a terrorist religon and all. I ask them to please first do some reasearch on islam before saying what kind of religon islam is



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 11:37 PM
link   
You have got to be kidding- the Quran never changed in the past? The Ottoman Caliphs loved to write Quranic verses and add them, how can the Quran not have changed? The bible has never been edited, in fact this was the reason the RCC loved killing Protestants in the Dark ages- we kept the Greek originals instead of using the "official" Vulgate written by Jerome which supported their case. No, preserving our scriptures are a serious matter, and I believe we did a fine job at it. The KJ translation has already been verified via computer check sums for instance, it is consistent. I don't think anyone here called Muslims terrorists, we merely point out that Muhammed was by all available accounts a questionable figure to be given the title of prophet. Muslims terrorists? Pfah, this isn't an Ann Coulter show


[edit on 17-3-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
You have got to be kidding- the Quran never changed in the past? The Ottoman Caliphs loved to write Quranic verses and add them, how can the Quran not have changed? The bible has never been edited, in fact this was the reason the RCC loved killing Protestants in the Dark ages- we kept the Greek originals instead of using the "official" Vulgate written by Jerome which supported their case. No, preserving our scriptures are a serious matter, and I believe we did a fine job at it. The KJ translation has already been verified via computer check sums for instance, it is consistent. I don't think anyone here called Muslims terrorists, we merely point out that Muhammed was by all available accounts a questionable figure to be given the title of prophet. Muslims terrorists? Pfah, this isn't an Ann Coulter show


[edit on 17-3-2006 by Nakash]


Trust me quran has'nt changed. There are alot of people (muslims) in the world who have memorized the whole quran. An yes i know that you were'nt calling muslims terrorists but i see alot of people (not here) but kinda every where saying that islam is all that and a backword religon and stuff.


[edit on 18-3-2006 by paf thunder]



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 12:25 AM
link   
The Quran has changed, trust me.The memorization issue is irrelevant since most muslims know it in a foreign language which they can't understand, and Muslims did a poor job keeping Muhammed's writings (he had none- it was a purely oral tradition for a century or so after his death for the most part) Even if it didn't change it's a botched up revisionism of the bible (no offense, but it is). Why read the Quran? Grab that bible and read about YHVH instead of Allah, will do you some good




[edit on 18-3-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 06:42 AM
link   
The Idea of the bible being preserved is impossible, The bible was written years after Jesus death, it was collected from memories of his followers. Actually the bible is just a historical book with so many versions. Also the divinity of Jesus was not approved until 300 AD. after 300 years of Jesus death the Roman Emperor (who was sun worshiper before converting to Christianity) formed a council to discuss the nature of Jesus. In that council only one third of the votes was for Son of God and the Emperor confirmed that. (LOL... divinity of Jesus was confirmed by -undemocratic- voting system)



[edit on 18-3-2006 by Deep_Blue]



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 07:37 AM
link   
The Quran was not changed and there is only one version of the Quran , The miracle of the perfect Arabic language of the Quran will make it easy to expose any change even if one single line was changed.

Also the original copies of the Quran are well preserved in Museums all around the world:

The Qur'anic Manuscripts In Museums, Institutes, Libraries & Collections


Here is a good picture:


Source

More examples:
An Early Qur'anic Manuscript In Tashkent, Uzbekistan

An Early Qur'anic Manuscript In The Topkapi Museum, Istanbul, Turkey

Go and visit those Musems and compare the old manuscripts with the current Quran text.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Blue, are you attempting to convince me or yourself? Do you honestly believe Constantine proclaimed the divinity of Christ ? Dear me, then those first and second century manuscripts must have been written in a time machine. The NT has copies from about 60 years after the death of Jesus Christ, can the Quran claim the same for Muhammed ? No, of course not (and I can prove that to you easily, since the first Quranic texts never existed during Muhammed's era- it was an oral tradition, ie: that word game boy scouts play for fun when camping). Regardless, Islam lacks theological legitimacy, it contradicts everything before it, and that is the best proof Muhammed was not a prophet, but an oportunist. The Bible is also self-consistent, the Quran isn't. Muhammed gives no reason for killing people, no reason for his piracy, no reason for any of his crimes. There is a consistent reason for everything within the Christian bible, Islam cannot claim the same.


Have you read the Bible Blue? I'm still up for that deal we were going to make (I'll read any Sura of your choosing, you will read a Gospel or other text of the NT of your own choosing)


[edit on 20-3-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deep_Blue
The Quran was not changed and there is only one version of the Quran , The miracle of the perfect Arabic language of the Quran will make it easy to expose any change even if one single line was changed.

Also the original copies of the Quran are well preserved in Museums all around the world:

The Qur'anic Manuscripts In Museums, Institutes, Libraries & Collections


Here is a good picture:


Source

More examples:
An Early Qur'anic Manuscript In Tashkent, Uzbekistan

An Early Qur'anic Manuscript In The Topkapi Museum, Istanbul, Turkey

Go and visit those Musems and compare the old manuscripts with the current Quran text.




Here's a site. It duicesses in the way Quran is written

link



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
Blue, are you attempting to convince me or yourself? Do you honestly believe Constantine proclaimed the divinity of Christ ?

The story is more complicated than you think. Have you heard about the First Council of Nicaea. The council was formed by Costantine in the 4th century , to discuss Important Christianity issues including The Divinity of Jesus. Issues approved in that council like Trinity resulted in the birth of the Catholic Church.


source
Prior to the time of Constantine's "conversion," Christians were persecuted not so much for their profession of faith in Christ, but because they would not include pagan deities in their faith as well. Then, with Constantine's emphasis on making his new-found Christianity palatable to the heathen in the Empire, the "Christianization" of these pagan deities was facilitated. For example, pagan rituals and idols gradually took on Christian meanings and names and were incorporated into "Christian" worship (e.g., "saints" replaced the cult of pagan gods in both worship and as patrons of cities; mother/son statues were renamed Mary and Jesus; etc.), and pagan holidays were reclassified as Christian holy days (e.g., the Roman Lupercalia and the feast of purification of Isis became the Feast of the Nativity; the Saturnalia celebrations were replaced by Christmas celebrations; an ancient festival of the dead was replaced by All Souls Day, rededicated to Christian heroes [now Hallowe'en]; etc.). A transition had occurred -- instead of being persecuted for failure to worship pagan deities, Christians who did not agree with the particular orthodoxy backed by the Emperor were now persecuted in the name of Christ! "Christianized" Rome had become the legitimate successor of pagan Rome! This is the sad origin of the Roman Catholic Church.


It seems that Constantine had an important role in changing the shape of Christianity forever.

Did Constantine proclaim the divinity of the Christ? Not exactly , Constantine had the influence but didn't directly proclaimed divinity of the Christ. Anyway this subject is off-topic and we need a separate thread and many hours of research to fairly cover the subject.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
Quranic texts never existed during Mohammed's era- it was an oral tradition

Just to inform you:
The Quran was written during Muhammad's (pbuh) era , but it was scattered in many manuscripts.

The Third Khalif Uthman (574 AD - 656 AD) collected the Quran from several manuscripts,

Although the manuscripts were available but the accuracy of the Text of the Quran was proved by hundreds of Sahaba (1st generation of Mohammad's followers) who memorized it .



Originally posted by Nakash
The NT has copies from about 60 years after the death of Jesus Christ, can the Quran claim the same for Muhammed ?

The Uthman Quran was written between 650-655 . Mohammad (pbuh) died in 632 Ad. Which means the Quran was collected 20 years after The death of Mohammad (pbuh).

BTW… The picture I provided in previous post is for the Uthman Quran.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
There is a consistent reason for everything within the Christian bible

Are you sure? aren't there any holes everywhere?
I told you before I don’t like to debate religious believes but you always force me to go in such things. for example the following statement of yours:


Originally posted by Nakash
Have you read the Bible Blue? I'm still up for that deal we were going to make (I'll read any Sura of your choosing, you will read a Gospel or other text of the NT of your own choosing)



That statement left to me no choice but to tell you the real deal:

I will read the bible if you give me convincing answers to the following questions:

Q1.
If Jesus is God then he must be eternal, then where was Jesus before he was born? Where is he now after his death? God is immortal and don't die.

Q2.
If there are 2 Gods with absolute power why would one of them obey the other? Why don't Jesus just go and creates his own earth if he is God?.

Q3. If Jesus is the savior and people don't go to heaven if they don't accept Jesus as their savior, Then what will happen to people before Jesus Arrival? are they all going to hell including prophets like Noah and Moses? Doesn’t it make more sense that worshiping God only will make you deserve going to heaven, as god is eternal and was available to be worshiped before Jesus Arrival?

Q4.

source
If Jesus was GOD, then why in Mark 12:29 Jesus said "Here, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord." The words "our God" indicate that Jesus had a higher God over him, a stronger God than him. Jesus didn't say "Your God". He said "our God" which includes Jesus as the creation of GOD.
If Jesus was GOD, then why did he ask for GOD's Forgiveness in Luke 23:34?


Q5.

source
If redemption through the blood of Christ, that one member of the Trinity, is all that is necessary for salvation, how are we to explain the many, many occasions in the Gospel that Jesus (PBUH!) details the necessity of submitting directly to the One God -- without ever mentioning the role of his (Jesus', PBUH!) redeeming blood?


There are many many other questions, But I promise you give me convincing answers to the above 5 questions and I will read the bible.


[edit on 21-3-2006 by Deep_Blue]




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join