Is it possible to be a Christian and a believer in Islam?

Originally posted by DarknStormy

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by DarknStormy
So why would it be so hard to believe that the bible predicts the arrival of Mohammed?

Maybe as an anti-christ. Since Islam rejects that Jesus is God Incarnate, they are anti-Christ. So sure .. you could say that the bible predicts the arrival of Muhammad.

Umm No. You will find the antichrist rises in the West, just like the Koran and the bible seem to both say.

It doesn't say that. Three of the 33 titles for the Man of Sin are "The Assyrian", "The King of Tyre", and "The King of Babylon". That's a powerbase from Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by DarknStormy

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by DarknStormy
So why would it be so hard to believe that the bible predicts the arrival of Mohammed?

Maybe as an anti-christ. Since Islam rejects that Jesus is God Incarnate, they are anti-Christ. So sure .. you could say that the bible predicts the arrival of Muhammad.

Umm No. You will find the antichrist rises in the West, just like the Koran and the bible seem to both say.

It doesn't say that. Three of the 33 titles for the Man of Sin are "The Assyrian", "The King of Tyre", and "The King of Babylon". That's a powerbase from Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq.

If you read the bible literally then yes your right.. But unfortunetly, a lot of the bible is nothing but symbology. Babylon could be anywhere.. The city of 7 hills could be anywhere, Antichrist could be anywhere. Just because it says the Antichrist will rise in the Middle East doesn't mean its going to be a Muslim either.

reply to post by DarknStormy

I think his point was that you claimed the bible said that the antichrist will rise in the west. When in fact the bible says it'll be persia/middle east area. (like I said .. the supposed MAHDI .. !!) As for taking it literally or not ... that's up to you. But if you are going to say that the bible claims the antichrist will rise from the west .... you might want to think about that claim again .. because it doesn't say that.

Originally posted by DarknStormy
The Antichrist is going to come from the West. The West in the grand scheme of things are the most powerful and possibly influential.

You are free to think that. But frankly, I think that China is much more powerful.

Can you see any Muslim declaring themselves God in Jerusalem?

Yep. I can. The world situation is fluid. Anything can happen. And it can happen fast. Heck .. The MUSLIM leader of Iran was recently quoted as saying that Venezuela's Chavez will come back with the Mahdi and help judge people. That's not exactly Muslim teaching and yet that's what he said. I can see some dude claiming to be the mythological 'Mahdi' and putting himself in Jerusalem .. and getting the backing of all the Muslims and muslim-appeasers around the world.

it says Rome will be destroyed in revelation so the Vatican is a very strong possibility.

A lot of people think Revelation was referring to the time period John lived in .. 2,000 years ago.

Revelation is a mess.
No one really knows what it means .. or if it even means anything.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by DarknStormy

 

I think his point was that you claimed the bible said that the antichrist will rise in the west. When in fact the bible says it'll be persia/middle east area. (like I said .. the supposed MAHDI .. !!) As for taking it literally or not ... that's up to you. But if you are going to say that the bible claims the antichrist will rise from the west .... you might want to think about that claim again .. because it doesn't say that.

Do you believe your leaders are Christians? If they are, why are they linked to Secret societies with their own orders and obligations? Bush - Skull and Bones, Obama - apparent 32 degree freemason etc.. If these people are christians, shouldn't they be following the bible and no other code?

Ok, think about this... You say the antichrist will rise in the Persian/Babylonian area. Whos been in Babylon for the last decade? Whos thinking about bombing Persia in the coming months/years? Again, How can you say that the AC isn't the West and what they have been doing for the past 10 years after 9/11? They say Dajjal will be one eyed/ spiritually blind in one eye - Take a look at your $1 bill... What do you see?

I see secret societies who do not value Christianity trying to destroy the Middle East.. What does the Bible say about money? Idoltry? other certian things? Your country and mine is plagued by this crap yet we blame a group of people who follow their religious laws and their word of god? How does that work? What if the Old Testamet laws from Moses were to be implied over the next month.. Would you accept them knowing the are the true laws of god?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
A lot of people think Revelation was referring to the time period John lived in .. 2,000 years ago.

Revelation is a mess.
No one really knows what it means .. or if it even means anything.

Revelation does refer to Johns time, and the late 1st Millenium, and the Medi Eval ages, and now... Is that to hard to believe? Revelation has never stopped playing out..

Originally posted by DarknStormy
Do you believe your leaders are Christians?

I have no idea about their personal religious convictions. Politicians lie. So .. who knows.

You say the antichrist will rise in the Persian/Babylonian area.

The bible says that. I have no idea.

we blame a group of people who follow their religious laws and their word of god?

When religious fanatics try to drag the world backwards I blame them for stupidity. Be they Muslims wanting Sharia law ... or certain fundamentalist Christians who think women who cut their hair or wear pants are evil ... or whatever.

what if the Old Testamet laws from Moses were to be implied over the next month.. Would you accept them knowing the are the true laws of god?

1 - There is no evidence that they are the 'true laws of God'.
2 - HELL NO I wouldn't accept them.

Originally posted by DarknStormy
Revelation does refer to Johns time, and the late 1st Millenium, and the Medi Eval ages, and now... Is that to hard to believe? Revelation has never stopped playing out..

Maybe. Maybe not. Revelation is impossible to figure out. For 2,000 years people have tried. Some claim to understand it. But no one really knows. And it's entirely possible that Revelation is NOT really 'revelation' from God and that it's just a really wild dream/dementia by an old fella' living in exile. We don't even know if it's from God or not. That's why I'm not too hung up on Revelation.

Originally posted by DarknStormy

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by DarknStormy

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by DarknStormy
So why would it be so hard to believe that the bible predicts the arrival of Mohammed?

Maybe as an anti-christ. Since Islam rejects that Jesus is God Incarnate, they are anti-Christ. So sure .. you could say that the bible predicts the arrival of Muhammad.

Umm No. You will find the antichrist rises in the West, just like the Koran and the bible seem to both say.

It doesn't say that. Three of the 33 titles for the Man of Sin are "The Assyrian", "The King of Tyre", and "The King of Babylon". That's a powerbase from Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq.

If you read the bible literally then yes your right.. But unfortunetly, a lot of the bible is nothing but symbology. Babylon could be anywhere.. The city of 7 hills could be anywhere, Antichrist could be anywhere. Just because it says the Antichrist will rise in the Middle East doesn't mean its going to be a Muslim either.

The nations that will be judged when Christ returns are listed in Joel 3.

Not one is from the west.

reply to post by FlyersFan


I'll show you why I think certain leaders are trying to push some prophecy through.. Firstly the EU poster from what ever year it came out.

The Tower of Babel or as I like to call it The Tower of BS



As you can see above the tower there are about 11 upside down pentagrams which are meant to represent stars. Any normal person would have them stars around the other way knowing the satanic nature of the ones i the poster.. If you don't understand what I'm talking about. then take a look at the below picture.



I understand it may mean nothing but it shouldn't be overlooked either. What does the bible say about the Tower of BS?

Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.

3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

Sound familiar? This is the outcome remembering that these people speak for everyone in Europe whether Europeans speak or not.. God also eventually scatters them all over the place apparently lol, But thats not the point.. Europe is ot mentioned in the Bible either so just because the Bible says Babylon or something, doesn't exactly mean it is directly referencing the Middle East.

The Modern day Tower of Babel in Strasbourg



If you don't think revelation is happening, then why is parts of Genesis making its way into the modern world?

I could go into this more.. The next part of the Bible is Abraham, correct? If you were to add up all the dates etc given, you will find that Abraham was born 1948 years after creation.. That may not seem like a big deal but I find it funny that Israel were recognised as a country in the very same year in our time.. The bible is playing out right now whether its revelation, Judges, Exodus or John. Why wouldn't revelation be also?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by 0SolidSnake0

 

:shk: Dude .. don't bother posting Qu'ran quotes to try to spook people .. or whatever your intent is. It doesn't work. The Qu'ran is just bits and pieces taken from the Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians .. with a bunch of misogyny thrown in .. and it's all BADLY rewritten at that. It means nothing.

That is the stupidest thing I've ever read.

Bits and pieces ? from an illiterate man who was a Shepherd . in the middle of no where. Where people were in complete darkness, Came what is till this day the Finest piece of literature, and poetry in the Arabic language. Bits and pieces "badly rewritten" you say ? A book filled with countless of Scientific foreknowledge . countless of verses not understood till lately with the advancement of science . Bits and pieces ? and stories that the shepherd heard right ?

These "bits and pieces" that you see similar with your bible, or should i say bibles are what has not been changed, or what has been modified from the original .

logical7

you mean luke can pick and choose any material to forward/suggest his 'opinion'.

Here's what he said (Luke 1: 1-4):

Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us, I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may realize the certainty of the teachings you have received.

A pretty flexible Holy Book i must say, choosing the quotes and incidents that fit the purpose!

Yes, Luke takes on a tremendous responsibility. However, his work is not as flexible as another book from a different religion that was made up by one guy working all by himself.

The rest of your post has been discussed; no sense me reposting the same things again. I would, however, like to address a bit of anti-Semitic hate-mongering by Mohammed whch you brought up in your reply to adj.

2:146. Those to whom We gave the Scripture (Jews and Christians) recognise him as they recongise their sons. But verily, a party of them conceal the truth while they know it.

This perennial blood libel, that some Jews know that Jesus is the Messaiah, but deny publicly what they transmit in secret, was told by Epiphanius in his Fourth Century Panarion (30, throughout). As with everything else in the Koran, we find the original in earlier writing, and as in this case, often not in the actual scripture of any religion, but in the propaganda and fan-fiction that people cranked out to supplement their canon.

As your team mate was kind enough to point out, Mohammed knew that others had noticed this problem with his "revelation."

[68.15] When Our communications are recited to him, he says: Stories of those of yore.

And, as you team mate forgot to mention, Mohammed knew how to handle critics.

[68.16] We will brand him on the nose.

Originally posted by 0SolidSnake0
That is the stupidest thing I've ever read.

Right back atchya.

Bits and pieces ? from an illiterate man who was a Shepherd . in the middle of no where. Where people were in complete darkness,

That's a load of crap.
1 - He wasn't a 'shepherd'. He was a caravan thief.
2 - They weren't out in the middle of nowhere. They were in the middle of trade routes with a lot of interaction between different groups of people.
3 - People weren't in 'complete darkness'. They had the Jewish, Christian, Zorostarian (as well as pagan) religions and beliefs being passed down and around. They weren't a bunch of neanderthals in caves.

Bits and pieces "badly rewritten" you say ?

Yep. Bits and pieces of the different religions ... all things Muhammad and everyone else had heard for hundreds and even thousands of years. He dictated all those stories to people to write down. Only thing .. he got the stories screwed up. He didn't even re-tell the old testament or bible stories correctly. There are no 'revelations' in the Qu'ran. Not a single one. And many of the practices in Islam come from the pagan religion .. such as the throwing of the rock at the 'devil' and running between the hills .. all came from the PAGANS.

A book filled with countless of Scientific foreknowledge . countless of verses not understood till lately with the advancement of science .

WRONG. The Quran is full of hundreds of scientific and historical ERRORS.
Read up and educate yourself ...
Thousands of errors in the Qu'ran
Scientific errors in the Qu'ran
Historical errors in the Qu'ran

Islam apologists like to say that the Qu'ran has 'scientific foreknowledge', but that simply is not true.
Again ... educate yourself ...

Like I said .. bits and pieces of other religions ...

The works of Ignaz Goldziher and Henri Corbin on the influence of Zoroastarianism on Islam; the workds of Geiger, Torrey and Katsch on the influence of Judaism; Richard Bell's pioneering work on the influence of Christianity; the work of Wllhausen, Noldeke, Hurgronje, and Robertson Smith on the influence of Sabianism and pre-Islamic Arabia; adn the work of Arthur Jeffery on the foreign vocabulary of the Koran, all combine to make us concur withZwemer's conclusion that Islam "is not an invention, but a concoction; there is nothing novel about it except the genius of Mohammad in mixing old ingredients into a new panacea for human ills and forcing it down by means of the sword" - Page 35, Why I am Not a Muslim, by Ibn Warraq

The most important stages in (Islam's) history were charcterised by the assimilation of foreign influences ... It's founder, Muhammad, did not proclaim new ideas. He did not enrich earlier conceptions of man's relation to the transcendental and infinite .. The Arab Prophet's message was an eclectic composite of religious ideas anad regulations. The ideas were suggested to him by contacts which had stirred him deeply, with Jewish, Christian and other elements - Ignaz Goldziher

Muhammad was not an original thinker: he did not formulate any new ethical principles, but merely borrowed from the prevailing cultural milieu. The eclectic nature of islam has been recognized fora long time. Even Muhammad knew Islam was not a new religion, and the revelations contained in the Koran merely confirmed already existing scriptures. The prophet always claimed islam's affiliation with the great religions of the Jews, Christians and others. Muslim commentators such as al-Sharestani have acknowledged that the Prophet transferred to Islam the beliefs and practices of the heathen or pagan Arabs, especially into the ceremonies of the pilgrimage to Mecca. - Page 34, Why I am not a Muslim, by Ibn Warriq

There is more information .. LOTS more .. that fully supports the FACT that islam was just bits and pieces taken from other religions in the area. Other religions that Muhammad had access to for decades via those coming through the area on the trade routes .. those caravans that Muhammad raided ....

reply to post by FlyersFan

I said THE RELIGION says it.

Of course you won't say that on ATS. you'd be banned. I said THE RELIGION says it.

All those verses are in context to the wars Mohammad was fighting.

They don't apply to every day non-believers so Islam does not demands the death of so-called infidels. Throughout the Koran there are contrasts made between believers and non-believers. God deals with them.

No it doesn't. Mary had Joseph as her spouse. He knew that she was carrying the Son of God. He's the foster father. God has no need of 'a wife' to procreate children. Thinking that He needs 'a wife' is, once again, earthbound in thought.

Thinking that God has a literal son is earthbound in thought.
Joseph was not Jesus' biological father and neither was God. Jesus was just a child for Mary.

The Holy Spirit did not overshadow Mary and she did not concieve until AFTER she said 'Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord, let it be done to me as you have said'. God waited until Mary agreed to be the mother of Jesus. She didn't just end up pregnant without giving her permission. That would have been rape.

What else did the angel say ?

He also said Mary had found favor with God and she would be with a child.
Thats it. He said nothing about the child being Gods literal son or God himself.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Maybe as an anti-christ. Since Islam rejects that Jesus is God Incarnate, they are anti-Christ.

You are making up your own definition of anti-christ.

The verse is ....
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the son.

NOT

"Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is God incarnate".

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I have no idea about their personal religious convictions. Politicians lie. So .. who knows.

Exactly and they don't follow the religious teachings either, they follow their own laws and therefore could all be Antichrists.

When religious fanatics try to drag the world backwards I blame them for stupidity. Be they Muslims wanting Sharia law ... or certain fundamentalist Christians who think women who cut their hair or wear pants are evil ... or whatever.

Muslims have a few traditions that would seem strange in our countries or even rights against humanity etc.. But underneath, they do have some meaning. To the West a burqa is a violation of womens rights but there is more to the practice than simply oppressing women. Think about it...

Imagine walking up to a woman wearing a burqa and communicating with her.. You don't see her body etc so your focus is directed at her thoughts only.. You are not judging her by the mini skirt she is wearing or the size of her jugs Now I'm not saying, America jump on board but there is more to this than simply looking at the Middle East and calling "Human Rights abuse". We don't take the time to learn those traditions and therefore we shouldn't judge them either.

1 - There is no evidence that they are the 'true laws of God'.
2 - HELL NO I wouldn't accept them.

But they are the apparent laws that were handed down by god and like your response "Hell No", imagine the west falling to any religious law... We are not following our own religious doctrines through politics regardless of how religious people think they are.. Are Muslims?

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
All those verses are in context to the wars Mohammad was fighting.

Many scholars disagree with you on that.
Would you like to start a thread on that and we can discuss it on that thread?

Thinking that God has a literal son is earthbound in thought.

Christ came down from heaven to earth. Therefore this subject is 'earthy' in nature.
It is also heavenly in nature. Heaven and earth met .. God came down and incarnated.
That's what Jesus said ... John 6:38 and that's what the angels said as well ...
So apparently it's not 'earthbound in thought' .. it's just accurate ...

Joseph was not Jesus' biological father and neither was God. Jesus was just a child for Mary.

Mary didn't make Jesus all on her own. She didn't just think him into existence.
God made Jesus in Mary's stomach without a human sperm. Therefore, God is Jesus father.

He also said Mary had found favor with God and she would be with a child.
Thats it. He said nothing about the child being Gods literal son or God himself.

Adoration belongs to God alone. The angels of Heaven know this.
The angels adored Christ. Hebrews 1:6
Therefore, the angels themselves recognized Jesus as God Incarnate.

The ArcAngel Gabriel said to Mary that Jesus would be the 'Son of God' - (Luke 1:32) - He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David.

Even the fallen angels knew Jesus was Son of God - Mark 5:7 - He shouted at the top of his voice, "What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? In God's name don't torture me!"

Originally posted by DarknStormy
Exactly and they don't follow the religious teachings either, they follow their own laws and therefore could all be Antichrists.

Scripture scholars will say that there is a general 'spirit of antichrist' and then there is 'an antichrist'. Two different things. People who work against Jesus can have the 'spirit of antichrist'. But there will come one who will be the total embodyment of antichrist ... THE antichrist. That would make a good thread discussion .. spirit of antichrist vs actual antichrist.

Muslims have a few traditions that would seem strange in our countries ..

You say 'strange'. I say misogynistic. Not allowing women to leave the home without a male family member escort? Not allowing women to drive? Not allowing girls to get an education? Not allowing women to have equal rights in a court of law? Not allowing women to wear what they wish and having 'morals police' give them beatings in the streets if they show an ankle or a wrist? I think that goes past 'strange' and into midieval backwards thinking which is bad for humanity.

But they are the apparent laws that were handed down by god

I dont believe so. The laws from around moses time include not eating shell fish and not using birth control (see Onanism) and many other things that are just not something I can see God doing. I think a lot of things were put out by humans but they claimed them to be from God. I'm VERY glad we are run by secular law. Religious law shouldn't be anywhere near our national laws. That would be a nightmare.

imagine the west falling to any religious law... We are not following our own religious doctrines through politics regardless of how religious people think they are.. Are Muslims?

Sorry .. can't follow you on that. I'm not sure what you are saying ...
Are you saying that Muslims aren't really following Muslim law??
I don't know about that ....

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
The verse is ....Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the son. NOT "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is God incarnate".

Scripture states that Jesus is God Incarnate.
To deny the essence of Jesus is to deny Him.
To deny the essence of Jesus is to deny His mission.
That is the 'spirit of anti-christ'.

There will be only one 'antichrist' .. but the spirit of antichrist is throughout the world.
(that's from scripture).

Jesus died for our sins and rose Himself from the dead.
To deny that is to deny Him. That's the spirit of antichrist.