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.

 

Reading the Bible with a Spirtual eye

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 

blah blah blah ... and wrong.
Dude ... your 'hierarchy lesson' was MUSLIM. It doesn't work for Christianity.
Jesus, being God incarnate to most Christians, isn't lower on the totem pole then Angels.
Jesus, being God incarnate to most Christians, isn't lower on the totem pole then prophets.
You've shown, once again, that you shouldn't be telling Christians how to be Christian.
You simply don't get it and your attempts to Muslim-ify Christians fails. To quote you ....

Your post here

sk0rpi0n
People don't usually learn science from those opposed to science. So there's no reason for people to learn Islam from those opposed to it.


So using that 'logic' ... People don't usually learn science from those opposed to science. So there's no reason for people to learn Christianity from those opposed to it. And since you have said that you can't wait for Christianity to die .. I'd say you are absolutely opposed to it and not able to teach Christians how to be Christians.




posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
@ FlyersFan ... ''I'd say you are absolutely opposed to it and not able to teach Christians how to be Christians'' - I dont recall trying to ''teach'' Christians how to be anything. There are certain theological issues that CAN be openly investigated by anybody with a half-decent knowledge of english, especially on an open forum such as this one. ________________________________________ You, on the other hand, outright reject half the bible as myth... and so your credibility as a ''Christian'' is laughable...and so biblical theology shouldn't really concern you.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   

FlyersFan
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Jesus, being God incarnate to most Christians, isn't lower on the totem pole then Angels.



FlyersFan. May I ask you? Do you see angels and Jesus as brothers and sisters working together on the same level or Jesus as a leader of angels?. I would like your christian opinion on it.

sk0rpi0n. May I ask you? Do you see Muḥammad as equal to Jesus and the angels or Muḥammad as a leader of angels?



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 03:19 PM
link   

LittleByLittle
Do you see angels and Jesus as brothers and sisters working together on the same level or Jesus as a leader of angels?.


Most of Christianity sees Jesus as God Incarnate and therefore Jesus, being creator, would have the Angels working for Him. I've heard that 'Jesus is a brother of certain angels' thing before. I think the LDS believe that. But I"m not sure. I'd have to look it up.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 03:27 PM
link   

FlyersFan

LittleByLittle
Do you see angels and Jesus as brothers and sisters working together on the same level or Jesus as a leader of angels?.


Most of Christianity sees Jesus as God Incarnate and therefore Jesus, being creator, would have the Angels working for Him. I've heard that 'Jesus is a brother of certain angels' thing before. I think the LDS believe that. But I"m not sure. I'd have to look it up.



Thank you for the information.
. I am looking at LDS pages right now to see what their ideas are. Interesting read for me.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   

bloodreviara
If you believe that you can read something into a book
that isn't clearly stated then you must therefore believe
that you have a special ability, IE spiritually reading the
bible where others cannot, hence this claim is based
upon pride in and of itself.

That is the problem with religion, it is all based in pride
and ego, the claim that you have the correct answer to
the so called after life.


I don't have any special ability...When I say read it with a spiritual eye all I mean is before you read sincerely and truly ask God to show you that he is real...and eagerly seek the truth...what is so hard about that?



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:04 AM
link   

sk0rpi0n
@ ServantOfTheLamb...... While the bible requires a sense of spirituality to be ubderstood, that doesn't mean we throw common sense and objectivity out of the window while reading the verses. Also, the meanings of certain words and phrases dont change for anybody. Claiming a ''spiritual eye'' does not mean distorting the meanings of words, or reading your own meanings into things.
edit on 19-12-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)


Friend,
I concur. We should not throw common sense and objectivity out the window. All I mean is that people should truly attempt to connect with God before and as they're reading it, and see if He reveals anything to them personally. At what point have I distorted words, or read my own meanings into things? I do believe everything I said lines up with Scripture, and if I was wrong someone please tell me why, and reference Scripture to back up your claim, and I will gladly apologize for the misinformation and correct it.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:12 AM
link   

sk0rpi0n
So a statement by a latecomer Paul on a subject, like say, forgiveness of sin, or the nature of God... does NOT take precedende over Jesus or Gods own words on the same subject. Paul wrote, at best a commentary....and no commentary takes precedence over the original body of work.


I agree. Paul is consistent with Jesus words as far as I am aware of. Jesus's words are Gods words, so saying Jesus or God was a bit redundant. Are you saying Jesus didn't preach about forgiveness of sin??



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Pardon?
And then bare in mind it was devised and written (and re-written and re-written etc etc) by men so no spirituality actually applies.
edit on 19/12/13 by Pardon? because: (no reason given)





Copyright © 2013 NormanGeisler.net - All rights reserved Due to more recent studies , the number has now swelled to 400,000 (Bart Ehrman, Misquoting Jes u s , p p. 89 - 90 ). Wallace agrees with this number, citing several sources . However, this number is misleading for a couple reasons. First, a “variant” is not an error. It is simply a different reading from the standard text. Second, the vast majority of variants are grammatical variants in form and do not affect the content of the message . Even Bible critic Bart Ehrman admits that “It would be a mistake, however, to assume that the only changes being made were by copyist with a personal stake in the wording of the text. In fact , most of the changes found in our early Christian manuscripts have nothing to do with theology or ideology . Far and away the most changes are results of mistakes, pure and simple — slips of the pen, accidental omissions, inadvertent additions, misspelled words, blunders of one sort or another” ( Misquoting Jesus , 55, emphasis added). Finally, as noted below, only a small fraction of the variants bear on the meaning of the text, and none affect any major doctrine of the Christian Faith. A correction to our previous publications should be noted here. Dan Wall ace pointed out in his article “ The Number of Textual Variants: An Evangelical Miscalculation ” that variant reading should not be counted by adding all the various readings in all the manuscripts. For example , a word spelled differently from the standard text i n 500 manuscripts is not counted as 500 variants. It is counted as one variant . The origin of this error was apparently Neil R. Lightfoot, How We Got Our B ible . Baker, 1963) from whom we sourced it in GIB rev, 468 , and it has spread from there. The Percent of Accuracy of the New Testament Manuscripts There have been different ways to estimate the percent of accuracy of the NT by different scholars . Here are estimates of several note d Greek scholars : Westcott and Hort estimated that only about one - sixtieth rise above “trivialities” and can be called “substantial variations.” Th at would make the NT 98.33 percent pure of any substantial variation. Ezra Abbott said about 19/20 (95 pe rcent) of the readings are “various” rather than “rival” readings, and about 19/20 (95 percent) of the rest make no appreciable difference in the sense of the passage. Thus the text would be 99.75 percent pure from rival readings that make a difference in the meaning of the text . A. T. Robertson said the real concern is with about a “thousandth pa rt of the entire text.” So, th e rec on structed text of the New Testament 99.9 percent free from real concern. Philip Schaff said that of the 150,000 variations known in his day , only 400 affected the sense; and of those only 50 were of real significance; and of these not one affected “an article of faith ....” ( Philip Schaff, Companion to the Greek NT and English Version, 177 , emphasis added ) . This means that the NT is 100% from any errors in essential doctrines of the Christian Faith. The words of Sir Frederic Kenyon still stand today : “The interval between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligib le, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down substantially as they were written has Copyright © 2013 NormanGeisler.net - All rights reserved now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established” (Kenyon, Bible and Archaeology . NY: Harper, 1940 , p. 288


Source



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Woodcarver

You are admiting to reading into the story what you want to see. It may not say clearly that certain folks are going to hell but it does clearly state that you should kill them brutally and at your earliest convenience. If it is your position that the collection of stories which you call the "bible" ( i.e. Bibliography; collection of books) are the divine words of an all knowing deity, and you dont kill the people whom it clearly states you must. Then you are endangering your eternal soul. So get at it.
edit on 19-12-2013 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)


Read some of my recent comments they explain what I meant, when I said a spiritual eye. The quoted statement shows a complete lack of understanding of what the Bible is about. Jesus said love your enemies, and to fight them with kindness.

40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

Friend,

You are speaking about the ways of the old covenant, which were not abolished by Jesus, but fulfilled.

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

If you would take the advice man, and read the Bible without the intent of proving that it is bologna, and instead only looking for the truth whether it be with or against what your believe you wouldn't have missed such simple concepts such as that.

edit on 20-12-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: hit enter on accident



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:42 AM
link   

rickymouse
I like to read the bible with an open mind. It is a good book. I see that homosexuals tried to take over societies in their writings and this caused problems. So they decided to ban homosexuals. When any group decides to seize power, it becomes a problem. This includes homosexuals.

It also appears that women may have tried to seize power before also, so they made a practice of suppressing women. Even the black people out of Africa seem to have tried to control things thousands of years BC I find. This may have spurred an uprising against them and contributed to our racial bias.

Religions have always been trying to take over and so have the power hungry people that would like to control everything. People have not changed yet. I can't see suppressing a whole race or class of people for the actions of a quarter of their members though. Herd practices do take effect though when enough crabby ones take control.

This policy of people taking over does not have to happen. We can live together peacefully and equally.

But people haven't changed in the last two thousand years, someone always wants to be controlling as many as they can. They will steer people to interpret something the way they interpret it and slam them if they interpret it differently.
edit on 19-12-2013 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)


I think you are a tad off base here friend.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 02:07 AM
link   

sk0rpi0n
@flyersfan..... ''Christian 'hierarchy' (if you call it that) has God the Father and Jesus on the same level of importance.'' - According to Christian scriptures, Jesus said to direct prayers to God. He never once said to anybody ''pray to me''. But you reject large chunks of the Bible anyway, so these details don't matter to you. __________________________________________________ ''Your Muslim way of reading the bible doesn't work for Christians'' - Apparently Jesus' own teachings don't seem to be working for Christians who ignore Jesus' teaching ''worship only God'' and prefer to make a god out of Jesus.


I believe you are the one who is disagreeing with Jesus if you believe he was not God.

Christianity does not have a hierarchy there is but one God. I bow to no man, but only to the King of Kings. The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit are one and the same. Jesus was the Son, and therefore was God.

Cor 1:15-16
The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. (Colossians 1:15-16).

John 10:30
I and my Father are one.



These are the words of Jesus Himself and the controversy is over the Greek word translated “one”. Here’s the position of those who deny the deity of Jesus. “John 10:30 is quite a controversial verse however when you read it in the Greek you learn that the Greeks have different words for the word one. There is a word for one in the same and a word or one in purpose. The Greek word used here is the word for one in purpose not one in the same.” Every major English translation agrees that this verse says, “I and the Father are one”. The Greek word translated “one” in this verse was used to say the number one when counting in Greek. A plain sense reading of the verse indicates that Jesus was saying He and the Father are one. Most Bibles offer no further explanation or clarification, indicating the verse means what it says. Only those who deny the deity of Jesus have trouble accepting this. And remember, the Jews wanted Jesus put to death for claiming to be God, not for claiming to have the same goals or purpose as God.


Source

John 14:9
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. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?



There are just a few verses that show the Son(Jesus) and the Father(God) are one in the same.

If you are Muslim sir I do not mean to offend, but please consider your statement made earlier

"So a statement by a latecomer Paul on a subject, like say, forgiveness of sin, or the nature of God... does NOT take precedende over Jesus or Gods own words on the same subject. Paul wrote, at best a commentary....and no commentary takes precedence over the original body of work. "

This statement also applies to Muhammad and the Qur'an.

Galatians 1
6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!

10 Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ.
Paul Called by God

11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 07:36 AM
link   

ServantOfTheLamb

Woodcarver

You are admiting to reading into the story what you want to see. It may not say clearly that certain folks are going to hell but it does clearly state that you should kill them brutally and at your earliest convenience. If it is your position that the collection of stories which you call the "bible" ( i.e. Bibliography; collection of books) are the divine words of an all knowing deity, and you dont kill the people whom it clearly states you must. Then you are endangering your eternal soul. So get at it.
edit on 19-12-2013 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)


Read some of my recent comments they explain what I meant, when I said a spiritual eye. The quoted statement shows a complete lack of understanding of what the Bible is about. Jesus said love your enemies, and to fight them with kindness.

40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

Friend,

You are speaking about the ways of the old covenant, which were not abolished by Jesus, but fulfilled.

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

If you would take the advice man, and read the Bible without the intent of proving that it is bologna, and instead only looking for the truth whether it be with or against what your believe you wouldn't have missed such simple concepts such as that.

edit on 20-12-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: hit enter on accident



I would agree with these tenets from the bible. These are good concepts for any one to follow and i'll go one further to say that a civilized society would need to follow all the good quotes from the bible, old and new testaments.

My problem with this mentality is that you are quote mining to serve your own purposes. What about all the horrible acts that the stories portray. Like when god orders moses to kill in his name and capture all the virgins. I am well read in many theologies and prob spend more time reading ancient texts than most.

The new testament isnt all shiny happy people either. My point being that you are picking through the nice parts and claiming that it is a book to base your life on.

I challenge you to find a 1 chapter each from old and new, that you disagree with or find abhorent. Because if you cant? Then you are blinded by your own dogma.

Jesus was not the first one portrayed to have said most of these tenets anyways. These ideas of taking care o your brethren and be a good sheperd and most of his more popular tenets were being passed around by buddhists and dharmists along with many more. There were plenty of good folks walking about before jesus.
edit on 20-12-2013 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Woodcarver

Jesus was not the first one portrayed to have said most of these tenets anyways. These ideas of taking care o your brethren and be a good sheperd and most of his more popular tenets were being passed around by buddhists and dharmists along with many more. There were plenty of good folks walking about before jesus.
edit on 20-12-2013 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)


Mithra, Siddhārtha Gautama (a buddha), Krishna, Jesus, Rumi, Nanak, Gandhi, Dalai Lama. Desmond Tutu. The right person for the right time all preaching non duality with their own words and in their own way.
edit on 20-12-2013 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2013 @ 01:30 AM
link   
"My problem with this mentality is that you are quote mining to serve your own purposes. What about all the horrible acts that the stories portray. Like when god orders moses to kill in his name and capture all the virgins. I am well read in many theologies and prob spend more time reading ancient texts than most."

I am not quote mining, and please if you accuse me of that then you need to have a reference proving that I stated something that was not Biblical. As for God ordering Moses to kill lets look at that from a different perspective. It seems you are saying God orders Moses to break one of the ten commandments, "Thou shalt not murder." This commandments intention is to prohibit murder(the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another). Things like warfare and self defense were treated differently under the law. Now lets look at the situation, and see if its as terrible as you make it out to be.

Genesis 15
13 Then the Lord said to him, “Know for certain that for four hundred years your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own and that they will be enslaved and mistreated there. 14 But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves, and afterward they will come out with great possessions. 15 You, however, will go to your ancestors in peace and be buried at a good old age. 16 In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure.”

17 When the sun had set and darkness had fallen, a smoking firepot with a blazing torch appeared and passed between the pieces. 18 On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi[e] of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates— 19 the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, 20 Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, 21 Amorites, Canaanites, Girga#es and Jebusites.”

Okay, so God has promised the Holy Land to Israel. However, he says that they cannot live their, why? The sin of the Amorites have not reached its full measure. Meaning for 400 years God gave them the option to quit their sinful ways. The two passages combined imply the of all the different people that were inhabiting the Israelites land, only the Amorites were not so far gone that God's righteousness demanded justice.

Deuteronomy 18
9 When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. 10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord; because of these same detestable practices the Lord your God will drive out those nations before you. 13 You must be blameless before the Lord your God.

So all of the nations inhabiting Israel were steep in occult practices, and already killing their own children, and performing other occult practices. This is why God chose to use the Israelite s as a weapon against said nations.

Deuteronomy 20

10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

Keep in mind slavery was different back then. Jews were expected to treat their slaves fairly, and you could only keep them for seven years. This is basically like a seven year prison sentence, and war is only ok when it is ordained by God.

Deuteronomy 20

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.

Remember that God is numerous fractals above time, and he states that they must kill everyone in order to stop the occult from spreading. This is something that his righteousness demanded of him, and He did give them a 400 year warning. So God ordered the death penalty to these nations in order to punish them for occult practices, and the murder of innocents.






The new testament isnt all shiny happy people either. My point being that you are picking through the nice parts and claiming that it is a book to base your life on.

References.

I challenge you to find a 1 chapter each from old and new, that you disagree with or find abhorent. Because if you cant? Then you are blinded by your own dogma.

So if I have came to the same opinion of all denominations of Christianity(most of the main points are taught correctly, but people just choose to ignore them and cherry pick the verses that make it seem ok for them be judgmental and it harms our faith) then I am blinded? I did not start reading the Bible, and assume everything I was reading was true. I believe that now, because most of the evidence I have seen, and personally experienced leads me to believe so. I do not disagree with anything in the Bible, sorry. However, that does not mean I refuse to question it. I know that Exodus has no archaeological evidence found to support its claim, and that many scholars say the Jews were never enslaved in Europe. I just believe more time is needed to find that evidence however.

Jesus was not the first one portrayed to have said most of these tenets anyways. These ideas of taking care o your brethren and be a good sheperd and most of his more popular tenets were being passed around by buddhists and dharmists along with many more. There were plenty of good folks walking about before jesus.


We all do good things occasionally, however we all sin pretty much everyday. I don't believe any of them were walking around teaching that their death would bring about the forgiveness of sin for all mankind...that is the only popular tenet in my opinion.

reply to post by Woodcarver
 



posted on Dec, 21 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 


Paul is consistent with Jesus words as far as I am aware of. Jesus's words are Gods words, so saying Jesus or God was a bit redundant. Are you saying Jesus didn't preach about forgiveness of sin
Paul was not always consistent with the words of Jesus. In fact, he contradicted Jesus in many ways. A discussion on how and why calls for an entirely new thread. But much has been written about this, so I can only leave you with these links from these presumably Christian sources...

Paul's Contradictions of Jesus (jesuswordsonly.com)

PAUL vs. JESUS - A List of Contradictory and Incompatible Statements (voiceofjesus.org)

Are Paul's Writings Faultless? (jesusfamilies.org)



All I mean is that people should truly attempt to connect with God before and as they're reading it, and see if He reveals anything to them personally. At what point have I distorted words, or read my own meanings into things?

An atheist or mocker reads the Bible to look for things to mock. A christian intends to connect with God, but most often reads to arrive at a pre-decided conclusion on a number of theological issues.

What I meant is that if you were to apply objectivity, take the words at face-value and refrain from reading meanings into verses, you would be closer to the meaning. This is my approach towards the Bible.

To illustrate, God stating "he follows my decrees and faithfully keeps my laws.That man is righteous. literally means that those who faithfully keep the laws are righteous. Yet, Christians negelect Gods direct words and mish-mash unrelated verses from Paul and all over the Bible to come up with something completely contradicting the statement from God. They may call it reading with a "spiritual eye", but it still amounts to:
a) Distorting the meaning of the words
b) Letting Pauls words take precedence over the direct words of God.

Of course, this happens when people take an if-its-in-the-Bible-it-must-be-true approach towards studying the Bible.



posted on Dec, 21 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 



I believe you are the one who is disagreeing with Jesus if you believe he was not God.


But Jesus never said directly he was God. Instead Jesus directly states that God was a separate entity... and was his God and the God of the people, when he said “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to myGod and your God.” (John 20:17)

This is absolutely perfect monotheism and I can ever disagree with Jesus on his message.



If you are Muslim sir I do not mean to offend, but please consider your statement made earlier
"So a statement by a latecomer Paul on a subject, like say, forgiveness of sin, or the nature of God... does NOT take precedende over Jesus or Gods own words on the same subject. Paul wrote, at best a commentary....and no commentary takes precedence over the original body of work. "
This statement also applies to Muhammad and the Qur'an.

Nothing wrong being a latecomer, as long as they don't contradict the previous prophets and Jesus.
Paul however does, refer to the links in my previous post. I was talking about latecomers in the list of Bible writers. Mohammad didn't author books to include in the Biblical canon. The Koran was a separate revelation to a separate people - the Arabians.

I am not going to convince you about Mohammads prophethood, but I will say that Isaiah 42 confirms the arrival of a certain servant of God who :

a) was called the "light of the Gentiles"
No Israelite prophet fits this, not even Jesus, who said that he came only the lost sheep of Israel. The Arabs were most definitely gentiles.

b) Influenced the people of Kedar, Sela and the wilderness
Let the wilderness and its towns raise their voices; let the settlements where Kedar lives rejoice. Let the people of Sela sing for joy; let them shout from the mountaintops. Let them give glory to the Lord
Kedar = son of Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs
Sela = Mountain in Medina where Mohammad fought a battle (wiki)
Wilderness = The harsh desert wastelands where the Arabs lived

c) Was instrumental in shaming the idolaters.
But those who trust in idols, who say to images, ‘You are our gods,’ will be turned back in utter shame.
Pre-Islamic Arabia was idolatrous. Mohammad indeed shamed the idolaters when he won and destroyed their idols and established Islam. They, being Mohammads mortal enemies, would have felt even more ashamed when Mohammad forgave them after his final victory over them.

d) Was instrumental in leading the people through new ways
I will lead the blind by ways they have not known,along unfamiliar paths I will guide them;
I will turn the darkness into light before them

This is what happened when Mohammad established Islam. The former idolaters left their old ways behind and accepted a religion that worshiped the One True God and revered Abraham, Moses and the prophets and revered Jesus as the Messiah.

Only Mohammad fits the descriptions of Isaiah 42. If you still aren't convinced, I'm not going to try to. All my above points are verifiable events in Islamic history. If some other candidate fits the descriptions of Isaiah 42, go ahead and post it!

Its natural for a Christian to dismiss the notion of Isaiah 42 pointing towards Mohammad, but the facts speak for themselves. Christians are always at a loss to explain the parallels between Isaiah 42 and the course of Mohammads life and can only resort to denial.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb
 


Skorpion. I stated that you are quote mining from the bible.

You are still quote mining.

You disagreed that god ordered moses to kill and then you post the direct quote when god orders him to kill. It doesnt matter why god wants him to kill. He is ordering murder. Your literal translations of the bible are some of the most dangerous thoughts i have ever seen. I can tell that you dont understand at all what you are saying. But lose the ego. You really do think your thoughts are the best way to serve society?

Slavery hasnt changed one bit in the last 5000 years. Instead of jesus telling folks how to properly treat your slaves, he should have said "slavery is wrong and dont do it." Do you think it is ok to have slaves, as long as you treat them the way jesus intended? Or do you think jesus was wrong to endorse slavery? Wtf?

Do you believe that people can consult with the dead?

Do you believe in witches?

Do you believe in talking donkeys?

Do you believe that thousands of dead people rose from their graves?

Or any of the hundreds of things depicted in the stories that we know are physically impossible. They didnt realise back then that these things were not possible so they attributed natural occurances to divine power, and also just made up some stuff to boot.

You believe the bible is irrefutable fact and then you dont pay any attention to when the facts dont match what we know to be true.
edit on 22-12-2013 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join