• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Islam and Judaism are refuted.

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I'm sure the peace will be assisted by people all over the world -- it would have to be.

I disagree that the world has more tragedy today. It has considerably less due to technology and medical science.

Growth in morality as in a broad consensus that you don't kill people for personal gain, nor do you coerce, etc.

I think that some morals are going down, such as care and well being of children (adults are putting our own interests first, such as our sexual desires). But in many other ways, morals are going up. In many places of the world, things like rape are finally being taken seriously. We are making a dent into such things as pedophilia. We are no longer turning a blind eye to domestic violence. Child marriage seems to be the next thing on the list to make unacceptable.

It's not that these things don't still go on. It's that they are broadly and sincerely condemned and we have put some teeth into their consequences.
Care and well being of children is essential for the health of society, no doubt. But there's more to it.
And regarding pedophilia, hardly is society "making a dent." Girls (and boys) who may go to religious schools often engage in sexual activity while they're very young (under the so-called age of consent), and their parents and teachers do not teach them the rules from God. Many parents themselves were sexually active in their young years without having married, and are not married yet could have many children.
One of the biggest industries in the world is pornography. While I do agree that horrible things have happened in the past, many, many horrific things are happening today at large, not just a few isolated. I would image jails are pretty full and possibly getting more of a population. And that's just the people who got caught. Technology is advanced, true, but greed, wars and injustices continue, diseases continue, medical mistakes abound, threats of nuclear war continue, and threats such as the earth exterminating itself due to pollution are certainly being proposed by scientists.
As far as not killing people for personal gain, well, in many ways that is certainly not being accomplished. So each dead person is worth something in God's eyes, meaning even if only 1 person dies as a result of carelessness or mistreatment by a doctor, God is aware of these things and knows how to take steps to rectify such matters. (It's called what Maimonides also called a resurrection.)
Getting back to religion for a moment, as I said, it's been quite a long time now that the temple in Jerusalem cannot be built. Maimonides was on the right track, but -- he's gone now and, like others including the Pope, have been influenced by other religious ideas.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Famous mistranslation.


9:6


1. The word "Yuladh" was mistranslated in the Christian bible as "will be born" when it should be "is born". Perfect tense. Something that already happened. If you want check Genesis 4:26. Same word. Different tense. So that's an intentional mistranslation.


2. The word "Vayyikra" has also been mistranslated as "will be called" instead of the correct translation which should be "called". If you want check Genesis 1:5 where its translated as 'already happened'. Another one.


Read Genesis 4:26 for reference. Same words Yulad and Vayyikra or "Yulad ben Vayyikra" has been translated as "Was born a son and he named" in the past tense.


Strange that these can be translated wrong only in Isaiah 9:6 to make it LOOK LIKE a prophecy so they intentionally turned it into future tense. And now you have based your whole post about two theologies being refuted by this particular scripture that your piers have intentionally mistranslated to mislead people like you.
Just in an extensive sense, many words must be placed in context and translated in different ways rather than literally. I'm not saying you're wrong, but one would have to look closely at the context and earliest usages. I have several different versions and translations of the Bible, the message is basically the same, but translations are different.
 
Last edited:

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I am not sure what you mean.. I don't think its right to commandeer Jewish scripture and change its meaning.
The New Testament is connected to the Old Testament. If you don't interpret it differently, then you aren't a Christian, and one wonders why you call yourself that, hence, as it's a contradiction.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
That is a very loaded question.

I can inform you what Baha'u'llah has revealed on this topic, or offer a view as to what I see the Bible says on this subject, from the view taken from those writings.

Regards Tony
Let me ask it differently then.
What do you think happens to the soul when a person dies? (Not what you think someone else thinks, but what you think.)
 
Last edited:

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
The New Testament is connected to the Old Testament. If you don't interpret it differently, then you aren't a Christian, and one wonders why you call yourself that, hence, as it's a contradiction.
There are various interpretations anyway of both the New and Old Testaments. Yet the man Jesus was not born when the Old Testament was written. So even then the religious leaders had serious disputes in interpreting what was happening.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Let me ask it differently then.
What do you think happens to the soul when a person dies? (Not what you think someone else thinks, but what you think.)
I think the soul leaves the body and ascends to the spiritual world where it takes on another form, a spiritual body comprised of spiritual elements that exist in that realm, and then it continues to progress spiritually for all of eternity.

What do you think happens to the soul when a person dies?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Just in an extensive sense, many words must be placed in context and translated in different ways rather than literally. I'm not saying you're wrong, but one would have to look closely at the context and earliest usages. I have several different versions and translations of the Bible, the message is basically the same, but translations are different.

Not exactly correct brother, but also not wrong. See, if you check a Jewish Tanah, you will see these simple words like "Was" is translated as "was" and it should be. When you translate it as "will be" its not a contextual rendering. Never.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
There are various interpretations anyway of both the New and Old Testaments. Yet the man Jesus was not born when the Old Testament was written. So even then the religious leaders had serious disputes in interpreting what was happening.
If we go by how Jesus was arguing even then, then, yes, that's just historically evidenced, it's obvious.

What became Christianity is based off a parallel belief system, to what became Judaism.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
The New Testament is connected to the Old Testament. If you don't interpret it differently, then you aren't a Christian, and one wonders why you call yourself that, hence, as it's a contradiction.

All thru Isaiah the servant is referenced as Israel.

God also references his son Israel.

Isaiah 41: 8
But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend
 
Last edited:

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Not exactly correct brother, but also not wrong. See, if you check a Jewish Tanah, you will see these simple words like "Was" is translated as "was" and it should be. When you translate it as "will be" its not a contextual rendering. Never.
You may be right, but in order for me to verify that, I'd have to see source references.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
All thru Isaiah the servant is referenced as Israel.

God also references his son Israel.

Isaiah 41: 8
But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend
Again -- two things. You have to consider what IS Israel -- who makes it up -- and something again very important in consideration of this -- the temple was destroyed virtually 2,000 years ago, at least something remained as a reminder, otherwise someone might say, "Oh, it's all made up, the temple never really existed."
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
If we go by how Jesus was arguing even then, then, yes, that's just historically evidenced, it's obvious.

What became Christianity is based off a parallel belief system, to what became Judaism.
Please explain in the sense of what you consider Christianity to be. If I thought all so-called Christian groups were approved by God, or any religion, including Bahai, Hindus, etc., I'd feel free to join. (But I don't.) Meanwhile, please explain what you mean in your sentence how you're terming Christianity. After the apostles died, a new version replaced the originating concepts. Then came Constantine. And -- my friend -- the rest is -- history. (Unfortunately, but also prophesied.)
(As I re-read your post above, I see your point better. But as I explained in a way, not all who call themselves members of a sect or religion are really that or representing truth, and as Pilate asked, "What is truth." Jesus stood before him. And yes, groups and sects in what is commonly termed Christianity and/or Judaism and/or other religions, can have drastically different viewpoints.)
 
Last edited:

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
All thru Isaiah the servant is referenced as Israel.

God also references his son Israel.

Isaiah 41: 8
But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend
Just from that statement alone, we can see that Israel = Jacob = seed of Abraham. Very open to interpretation or recognition as to who constitutes what. Then there is the thought of servant. Willing? Unwilling? (How interesting, glad you brought that out anyway.)
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Again -- two things. You have to consider what IS Israel -- who makes it up -- and something again very important in consideration of this -- the temple was destroyed virtually 2,000 years ago, at least something remained as a reminder, otherwise someone might say, "Oh, it's all made up, the temple never really existed."

Most prophecy was written after the fact.

Early Jewish Writings is a helpful resource.

Isaiah

Isaiah was written about 167 BC and refers to history.. as in the expectation of the Cyrus prophecy.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Just from that statement alone, we can see that Israel = Jacob = seed of Abraham. Very open to interpretation or recognition as to who constitutes what. Then there is the thought of servant. Willing? Unwilling? (How interesting, glad you brought that out anyway.)

There is a verse about "out of Egypt I have called my son" Hosea 11 (I think)

Matthew takes a part of Hosea and changes it to mean Baby Jesus and family fled to Egypt.

Here it is Hosea 11:1

11 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. Hosea isn't talking about Jesus.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
All thru Isaiah the servant is referenced as Israel.

God also references his son Israel.

Isaiah 41: 8
But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend
Christians at least traditionally do consider themselves Israel, so I'm not sure your argument here would somehow only indicate Jews. According to the New Testament, Christians are in the Abrahamic Covenant partly because of Jesus, however , Book of Galatians, relates many non Jews to the Abrahamic Covenant. If you read Book of Acts, and book of Galatians, you will note that the Christians generally believed
• the added laws are contributed to Moses and the Priests.
• Moses isn't necessarily attributed to writing all the added laws, so for example the bad added laws are attributed to Priests, [book of Acts
• although Moses isn't called or considered bad, [book of Galatians, the bad laws added by priests were necessarily so.
• the Covenant of Abraham, precedes the Covenant of Moses, called 'the covenant of circumcision', and is considered preeminent to the added laws of Moses and the Priests.[book of Galatians, though concerning circumcision, not necessarily book of Acts.
• the Apostle Paul equates circumcision to Mosaic law, not Abrahamic Covenant. In other words, there were two verses of what God said to Abraham, the canonized version disagreeing with ex Pharisee Apostle Paul, though giving basically two accounts, it seems, [[sort of a strange do' over in the verses, by my estimation, like they were presenting both "versions", one where God mentions physical circumcision, the other, it isn't there.

Please explain in the sense of what you consider Christianity to be. If I thought all so-called Christian groups were approved by God, or any religion, including Bahai, Hindus, etc., I'd feel free to join. (But I don't.) Meanwhile, please explain what you mean in your sentence how you're terming Christianity. After the apostles died, a new version replaced the originating concepts. Then came Constantine. And -- my friend -- the rest is -- history. (Unfortunately, but also prophesied.)
(As I re-read your post above, I see your point better. But as I explained in a way, not all who call themselves members of a sect or religion are really that or representing truth, and as Pilate asked, "What is truth." Jesus stood before him. And yes, groups and sects in what is commonly termed Christianity and/or Judaism and/or other religions, can have drastically different viewpoints.)

That waa just a general statement. What became "Christianity", which does vary, though some branches vary less, now, it seems. I wouldn't say 'representing truth', is the definition I'm using for Christianity, as a general category of religion. Therefore, it's more textual, and has to do with Salvation, also.
 
Last edited:

firedragon

Veteran Member
You may be right, but in order for me to verify that, I'd have to see source references.

Source references?

The source reference is Isaiah 9:6.

If you wish, check an interlinear translation with transliteration. Then refer the same tense, same word in other places of the Bible. You can do it easily if you like (as you probably already know) on www.biblehub.com. You will see the intentional misrepresentation of simple language. That is if you wish to see.

9:6
1. The word "Yuladh" was mistranslated in the Christian bible as "will be born" when it should be "is born". Perfect tense. Something that already happened. If you want check Genesis 4:26. Same word. Different tense.

2. The word "Vayyikra" has also been mistranslated as "will be called" instead of the correct translation which should be "called". If you want check Genesis 1:5 where its translated as 'already happened'.

Read Genesis 4:26 for reference. Same words Yulad and Vayyikra or "Yulad ben Vayyikra" has been translated as "Was born a son and he named" in the past tense.

Strange that these can be translated wrong only in Isaiah 9:6 to make it LOOK LIKE a prophecy so they intentionally turned it into future tense.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I think the soul leaves the body and ascends to the spiritual world where it takes on another form, a spiritual body comprised of spiritual elements that exist in that realm, and then it continues to progress spiritually for all of eternity.

What do you think happens to the soul when a person dies?
We have to start at the beginning to firmly understand it. And I have come to believe the Bible, which tells the truth about the soul and life. The soul does not leave the body and then live for all eternity. When we die, the soul can be in God's memory. What is interesting is what Jesus said at Matthew 10:28:
(Weymouth New Testament)
"And do not fear those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul; but rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna."
So Jesus knew that God--his God and Father--could destroy both body AND soul in Gehenna. Which some people translate as hell, but hell and Gehenna are two different things.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Source references?

The source reference is Isaiah 9:6.

If you wish, check an interlinear translation with transliteration. Then refer the same tense, same word in other places of the Bible. You can do it easily if you like (as you probably already know) on www.biblehub.com. You will see the intentional misrepresentation of simple language. That is if you wish to see.

9:6
1. The word "Yuladh" was mistranslated in the Christian bible as "will be born" when it should be "is born". Perfect tense. Something that already happened. If you want check Genesis 4:26. Same word. Different tense.

2. The word "Vayyikra" has also been mistranslated as "will be called" instead of the correct translation which should be "called". If you want check Genesis 1:5 where its translated as 'already happened'.

Read Genesis 4:26 for reference. Same words Yulad and Vayyikra or "Yulad ben Vayyikra" has been translated as "Was born a son and he named" in the past tense.

Strange that these can be translated wrong only in Isaiah 9:6 to make it LOOK LIKE a prophecy so they intentionally turned it into future tense.
I looked so far at Isaiah 9:6 (biblehub) and see that many translations, including the King James, uses "IS" born at the beginning of the verse. One at least says a child "has been" born. Glad you pointed out that scripture, because I almost made a mistake and said a SON has been born, but it doesn't say that in English translations. It says, "A CHILD is (or has been) born."
Better for the English speaking audience perhaps currently. And yes, there are varying translations for the same word if I understand the interlinear explanations properly. Perhaps that is one expression there. I usually stick to one point at a time, so if I missed something, please let me know.
Yes, a few translations do say "will be born."
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Christians at least traditionally do consider themselves Israel, so I'm not sure your argument here would somehow only indicate Jews. According to the New Testament, Christians are in the Abrahamic Covenant partly because of Jesus, however , Book of Galatians, relates many non Jews to the Abrahamic Covenant. If you read Book of Acts, and book of Galatians, you will note that the Christians generally believed
• the added laws are contributed to Moses and the Priests.
• Moses isn't necessarily attributed to writing all the added laws, so for example the bad added laws are attributed to Priests, [book of Acts
• although Moses isn't called or considered bad, [book of Galatians, the bad laws added by priests were necessarily so.
• the Covenant of Abraham, precedes the Covenant of Moses, called 'the covenant of circumcision', and is considered preeminent to the added laws of Moses and the Priests.[book of Galatians, though concerning circumcision, not necessarily book of Acts.
• the Apostle Paul equates circumcision to Mosaic law, not Abrahamic Covenant. In other words, there were two verses of what God said to Abraham, the canonized version disagreeing with ex Pharisee Apostle Paul, though giving basically two accounts, it seems, [[sort of a strange do' over in the verses, by my estimation, like they were presenting both "versions", one where God mentions physical circumcision, the other, it isn't there.

That waa just a general statement. What became "Christianity", which does vary, though some branches vary less, now, it seems. I wouldn't say 'representing truth', is the definition I'm using for Christianity, as a general category of religion. Therefore, it's more textual, and has to do with Salvation, also.

Moses never wrote anything. The laws were borrowed from the Code of Hammurabi.

Look at when Hosea lived.

Hosea was a prophet who lived and prophesied just before the destruction of Israel in 722 BC. He preached to the northern kingdom. He wasn't referring to Jesus as my beloved son.. He was talking about Israel. Hosea 11:1.
 
Top