• 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!

Quran from the devil

Booko

Deviled Hen
You wrote to Becky:

rocka21 said:
I never said i was dead set against Muslims and there beliefs.

Not directly, but it's impression I get from your posts. Apparently I'm not the only one that gets the impression. If that's not what you mean, you might want to consider a change to your writing style. :shrug:

its funny how i quote a scripture from the bible and you get mad at me like " i said it".

There are people who quote Scripture to support their points, to encourage others, to educate and edify, and then there are those who quote Scripture like it's a hammer to be used on someone else's head.

Again, it ain't just Becky that gets the hammer-like impression. Maybe the both of us are nuts, maybe not. Just something to consider, Rocka.
 

rocka21

Brother Rock
Booko said:
[/i][/u][/b]Which part of "Yes" did you not understand?



And what does this have to do with whether the Quran says Jesus is the Christ or not?

Gee, I'm sorry I kicked a big hole in that theory that the Quran denies that Jesus is the Christ, but that doesn't mean you get to try and make a quick feint and expect no one to notice you just moved sideways...



13When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
here we see Jesus is not a prophet, but the CHRIST . THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.
please, correct me if i am wrong, muslims believe jesus was a prophet and if you read the post above they DO NOT believe he was the son of God.
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Jesus founded the new testament church on this revelation. So, yes this is very important. So, yes Jesus is the annointed one and he Is the Son of God.

do Muslims believe this?
 

rocka21

Brother Rock
Booko said:
You wrote to Becky:



Not directly, but it's impression I get from your posts. Apparently I'm not the only one that gets the impression. If that's not what you mean, you might want to consider a change to your writing style. :shrug:



There are people who quote Scripture to support their points, to encourage others, to educate and edify, and then there are those who quote Scripture like it's a hammer to be used on someone else's head.

Again, it ain't just Becky that gets the hammer-like impression. Maybe the both of us are nuts, maybe not. Just something to consider, Rocka.

i am sorry, yes, i am passionate in my debates. At least i give you someone to get fired up at!:angel2:

I think sometimes, Jesus, paul, James, they all came down like a hammer at times.
it was because their faith was so sure.

i would expect any Muslim, LDS, JW , or whatever to be the same way.
is this not the whole point of a debate? to see different sides of views.

or maybe we should call this site " unitarian pattycake , i am ok, you are ok, debate.com)( :D
</IMG></IMG></IMG>
 

Bishka

Veteran Member
rocka21 said:
i am sorry, yes, i am passionate in my debates. At least i give you someone to get fired up at!

Not fired up, just merely annoyed at.

rocka21 said:
I think sometimes, Jesus, paul, James, they all came down like a hammer at times.
it was because their faith was so sure.

i would expect any Muslim, LDS, JW , or whatever to be the same way.

So you don't expect a Muslim, LDS, JW to have a sure faith?


rocka21 said:
or maybe we should call this site " unitarian pattycake , i am ok, you are ok,

"I am ok, you are ok". What's wrong with this? We all are pretty okay people. We may not agree, but at least most of us hold each others beliefs as valid beliefs for that person.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
rocka21 said:
here we see Jesus is not a prophet, but the CHRIST . THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.
please, correct me if i am wrong, muslims believe jesus was a prophet and if you read the post above they DO NOT believe he was the son of God.

Yes, they believe Jesus was a prophet. So? Did or did not God speak through Jesus? If so...guess what -- he's a prophet.

No, they don't believe he's a PHYSICAL Son of God...and my guess is, neither do you, so what's your point?

And lastly, it is NOT important what Muslims believe -- it's important what Muhammad taught and what the Quran says. What Muslims believe may or may not be what Muhammad meant. This is nothing new when it comes to religions, considering all humans are fallible.

Jesus founded the new testament church on this revelation. So, yes this is very important. So, yes Jesus is the annointed one and he Is the Son of God.
do Muslims believe this?

Do you believe Moses was a prophet?

If so, why are you NOT a Jew???

When you can answer this question, then you will understand why Muslims are not part of your church, but still believe in Jesus.

It's really not that difficult to understand, and surely not for a Christian.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
rocka21 said:
i am sorry, yes, i am passionate in my debates. At least i give you someone to get fired up at!
Well, I would not suggest you take up being lukewarm. :)

I think sometimes, Jesus, paul, James, they all came down like a hammer at times.
it was because their faith was so sure.
There's a difference between being sure and coming off as arrogant, Rocka. Besides, I suspect you and I would agree on one thing, and that's that Jesus had every right and authority to come down like a hammer. Being infallible, it's not like He'd be making a mistake, eh? Ah, but we, we have no such latitude.

i would expect any Muslim, LDS, JW , or whatever to be the same way.
is this not the whole point of a debate? to see different sides of views.
Vigorous apologetics are fine...insults are not.

or maybe we should call this site " unitarian pattycake , i am ok, you are ok, debate.com)( :D
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/faq.php?faq=vb_faq#faq_new_faq_item

Kinda explains what anyone here needs to know.

I'm sure you realize there's a huge middle ground between inflammatory and wishywashy though. ;)

Oh, and btw, implying that the Unitarians only play pattycake is a) questionable, b) not supported in any other way by you, and c) likely to be strongly challenged by our Unitarians, which should effectively disprove that Unitarians are only interested in pattycake.

(Shall we duck together, before they pop in and notice this one? haha!)
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
rocka21 said:
13When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.


so this is what the quran means when it says Jesus is the christ?
so Muslims are a part of the church Jesus built?
Convenient that you choose Matthew's version.

Mark tells us;
"And he asked them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered him, "You are the Christ." And he strictly charged them to tell no one about him."

Luke tells us:
"Then he said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" And Peter answered, "The Christ of God."

That's two against one for Peter answering that Jesus was the Christ alone, which is in line with Qu'ranic teachings.

Since both Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source, and Luke retains the version as put forth by Mark, it is very safe to say that Matthew's version of the Confession has either been exaggerated by the author, or that it has been subject to later interpolation by a follower of the Johannine tradition.

It is important to remember that Jesus never said himself that he was the Son of God, the title was always placed upon him by others - specifically the later Johannine traditions that produced the gospels and letters of John, which attempt to show Jesus as God - as opposed to the synoptic gospels which portray Jesus as prophet and Messiah, but not divine.
 

*Paul*

Jesus loves you
fullyveiled muslimah said:
It is disheartening to think that some christians view islam as an arch enemy, and the best way to discredit it is to say that the very book and thusly the ideas on which it is based are from the devil. I find it an immature alternative to simply disagreeing with it.
I am especially disappointed with Paul comments (not YmirGf). I hold him to be a rather devout and intellignet christian who wouldn't resort to that, but I guess to each his own and you learn something new everyday.
What alternatives are there? It wasn't meant to be personal or an attempt to discredit the koran I was simply showing why a Christian would believe this. I am told that Mohammed was a man of honest report amongst everyone, so I wouldn't assume he just made it all up. If the koran is from God and is the last testament then I should definatly become a Muslim. The other alternative is that Mohammed was decieved by the being that gave him the revelation. Since it contradicts what I know to be the Word of God this is the option i opt for and it goes to every other religion or religious book out there.
I would not give anyone the impression that I as a Christian believe that the koran could be from God but my message should be clear:
Acts 2v38-39: Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Muslims certainly do not feel that the bible or christianity is derived from the devil.
You can't because the koran speaks of the scripture as having been given by allah.
[2.53] And when We gave Musa the Book and the distinction that you might walk aright.
[2.87] And most certainly We gave Musa the Book and We sent apostles after him one after another; and We gave Isa, the son of Marium, clear arguments and strengthened him with the holy spirit, What! whenever then an apostle came to you with that which your souls did not desire, you were insolent so you called some liars and some you slew.
[5.110] When Allah will say: O Isa son of Marium! Remember My favor on you and on your mother, when I strengthened you I with the holy Spirit, you spoke to the people in the cradle and I when of old age, and when I taught you the Book and the wisdom and the Taurat and the Injeel; and when you determined out of clay a thing like the form of a bird by My permission, then you breathed into it and it became a bird by My permission, and you healed the blind and the leprous by My permission; and when you brought forth the dead by My permission; and when I withheld the children of Israel from you when you came to them with clear arguments, but those who disbelieved among them said: This is nothing but clear enchantment

And so on as I'm sure you are aware, but there is no such obligation upon Christians but rather warns us about adding to it or taking from it.

I'm not saying that muslims are evil or that i hate them, I simply view them as being decieved and kept blinded from the truth as I do any other religion.

That is my belief as a Christian and is something I would have assumed was not in the least bit shocking to anyone.
 

rocka21

Brother Rock
Booko said:
Yes, they believe Jesus was a prophet. So? Did or did not God speak through Jesus? If so...guess what -- he's a prophet.

No, they don't believe he's a PHYSICAL Son of God...and my guess is, neither do you, so what's your point?

And lastly, it is NOT important what Muslims believe -- it's important what Muhammad taught and what the Quran says. What Muslims believe may or may not be what Muhammad meant. This is nothing new when it comes to religions, considering all humans are fallible.



Do you believe Moses was a prophet?

If so, why are you NOT a Jew???

When you can answer this question, then you will understand why Muslims are not part of your church, but still believe in Jesus.

It's really not that difficult to understand, and surely not for a Christian.



Yes , i do believe Jesus was Gods Physical son ( mary was pregnant by the holy Ghost). And he was GOD IN FLESH.
Yes, this is what christians believe.
 

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
Maybe we should decide what the word "Christ" means and what it doesn't mean?

It's Greek, and means "Annointed". Annointment is described in the Book of Kings. Saul, David and Solomon among others were "annointed" as King. Annointed means also 'dedicated'. Saul, David and Solomon among others were dedicated to God to be King.

In a sense, Baptism is Annointment (it just substitutes water for oil). John baptised Jesus, to recognize Jesus' dedication to God.

In this sense there is no doubt that Jesus is Christ and Messiah. Neither role specified that the individual be the genetic Son of God.

Jesus never claimed the title of Son of God, though He seems to have accepted it from Peter. Jesus claimed to be the Son of Man. Maybe that's more important, in fact, I am sure it is.

Regards,
Scott
 

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
rocka21 said:
13When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.


so this is what the quran means when it says Jesus is the christ?
so Muslims are a part of the church Jesus built?

I'd say "YES".

Actually it's the Church Abraham laid the corner stone for and to which all the Prophets have added--including Jesus. It's a magnificent Cathedral, never to be finished because God will never withdraw Himself from mankind.

Regards,

Scott
 

Islam

Member
Rocka, you fail to understand and realize that in the language Jesus used, son of God was a saying used to everyone and anyone who was a rightouse man, a man of relegion. And thats what Jesus was. Don't take the saying and judge it according to todays standards.


SONS OF GOD: The Bible ascribes sons by the tons to God. (a) 'Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the SON OF GOD." LUKE 3:38 (b) "That the SONS OF GOD saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took wives of all which they chose. ". . when the SONS OF GOD came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." GENESIS 6:2 and 4 (c) " . . Thus- saith the Lord, Israel is MY SON even my FIRSTBORN." EXODUS 4:22 (d) " . . and Ephraim is my FIRSTBORN," JEREMIAH 31:9 (e) " . . Thou (o David) ART MY SON; this day have I (God) BEGOTTEN thee. " PSALMS 2:7 (TONS A ton is 2000 lbs weight, that is about a thousand kilograms.) ("FIRST BORN:" How can there be two "firstborns"?) ("BEGOTTEN" How can God beget David at the age of forty? "This day'?)

Is this literaly? Of course not! It is metaphoricaly, the same with Jesus Christ peace be upon him. We are all the sons of God metaphoricaly. But when you say it is literaly that God begott Jesus you are crossing the line and are disrespecting God. Are you trying to say that the Holly Spirit had sex with Marry?!

Jesus's birth:
The Biblical Version:

"And the angle answered and said into her : 'The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee" (Luke 1:35)

Can't you see that you are giving the atheist, the skeptic, the agnostic a stick to beat you with? They may well ask "How did the Holy Ghost come upon Mary?" "How did the Highest overshadow her?" We know that literally it does not mean that: that it was an immaculate conception, but the language used here, is distasteful. Now contrast this with the language of the Quran:

The Quranic Version:

"He said (the angel says in reply): 'Even so: Allah (God) createth what He willeth: when He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!' " (3:47)

This is the Muslim concept of the birth of Jesus. For God to create a Jesus, without a human father, He merely has to will it. If He wants to create a million Jesus' without fathers or mothers, He merely wills them into existence. He does not have to take seeds and transfer them, like men or animals by contact or artificial insemination . He wills everything into being by His word of command "Be" and "It is".


Between these two versions of the birth of Jesus, the Quranic version and the Biblical version, which would you prefer to give your daughter ?

The Quran continues and makes it even more clearer for you and says:

"This similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam: He created him from dust then said to him: "Be" and he was.
The truth (comes) from Allah alone; so be not of those who doubt."


God continues and tells you in the Glorius Quran:

The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him).

Fain would they extinguish Allah's light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow but that His light should be perfected, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).

It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it).

O ye who believe! there are indeed many among the priests and anchorites, who in Falsehood devour the substance of men and hinder (them) from the way of Allah. And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah: announce unto them a most grievous penalty-

On the Day when heat will be produced out of that (wealth) in the fire of Hell, and with it will be branded their foreheads, their flanks, and their backs, their flanks, and their backs.- "This is the (treasure) which ye buried for yourselves: taste ye, then, the (treasures) ye buried!"

(9:30-35)
 

rocka21

Brother Rock
Islam said:
Rocka, you fail to understand and realize that in the language Jesus used, son of God was a saying used to everyone and anyone who was a rightouse man, a man of relegion. And thats what Jesus was. Don't take the saying and judge it according to todays standards.


SONS OF GOD: The Bible ascribes sons by the tons to God. (a) 'Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the SON OF GOD." LUKE 3:38 (b) "That the SONS OF GOD saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took wives of all which they chose. ". . when the SONS OF GOD came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." GENESIS 6:2 and 4 (c) " . . Thus- saith the Lord, Israel is MY SON even my FIRSTBORN." EXODUS 4:22 (d) " . . and Ephraim is my FIRSTBORN," JEREMIAH 31:9 (e) " . . Thou (o David) ART MY SON; this day have I (God) BEGOTTEN thee. " PSALMS 2:7 (TONS A ton is 2000 lbs weight, that is about a thousand kilograms.) ("FIRST BORN:" How can there be two "firstborns"?) ("BEGOTTEN" How can God beget David at the age of forty? "This day'?)

Is this literaly? Of course not! It is metaphoricaly, the same with Jesus Christ peace be upon him. We are all the sons of God metaphoricaly. But when you say it is literaly that God begott Jesus you are crossing the line and are disrespecting God. Are you trying to say that the Holly Spirit had sex with Marry?!

Jesus's birth:
The Biblical Version:

"And the angle answered and said into her : 'The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee" (Luke 1:35)

Can't you see that you are giving the atheist, the skeptic, the agnostic a stick to beat you with? They may well ask "How did the Holy Ghost come upon Mary?" "How did the Highest overshadow her?" We know that literally it does not mean that: that it was an immaculate conception, but the language used here, is distasteful. Now contrast this with the language of the Quran:

The Quranic Version:

"He said (the angel says in reply): 'Even so: Allah (God) createth what He willeth: when He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!' " (3:47)

This is the Muslim concept of the birth of Jesus. For God to create a Jesus, without a human father, He merely has to will it. If He wants to create a million Jesus' without fathers or mothers, He merely wills them into existence. He does not have to take seeds and transfer them, like men or animals by contact or artificial insemination . He wills everything into being by His word of command "Be" and "It is".


Between these two versions of the birth of Jesus, the Quranic version and the Biblical version, which would you prefer to give your daughter ?

The Quran continues and makes it even more clearer for you and says:

"This similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam: He created him from dust then said to him: "Be" and he was.
The truth (comes) from Allah alone; so be not of those who doubt."


God continues and tells you in the Glorius Quran:

The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him).

Fain would they extinguish Allah's light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow but that His light should be perfected, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).

It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it).

O ye who believe! there are indeed many among the priests and anchorites, who in Falsehood devour the substance of men and hinder (them) from the way of Allah. And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah: announce unto them a most grievous penalty-

On the Day when heat will be produced out of that (wealth) in the fire of Hell, and with it will be branded their foreheads, their flanks, and their backs, their flanks, and their backs.- "This is the (treasure) which ye buried for yourselves: taste ye, then, the (treasures) ye buried!"

(9:30-35)



Matthew 27:40</STRONG>
And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.
Matthew 27 (Whole Chapter) Matthew 27:42-44 (in Context) Matthew 27:54
Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
Matthew 27 (Whole Chapter) Mark 1:1-3 (in Context) Mark 3:11
And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God.



so i am suppose to take from these verses that he was " A" son of God, but not

"THE" son of God. ......... OK...........:cool:


nice try thou.....:angel2:












</IMG>
 

rocka21

Brother Rock
Is this literaly? Of course not! It is metaphoricaly, the same with Jesus Christ peace be upon him. We are all the sons of God metaphoricaly. But when you say it is literaly that God begott Jesus you are crossing the line and are disrespecting God. Are you trying to say that the Holly Spirit had sex with Marry?!


Jesus had to be GOD IN FLESH. He had to SHED HIS BLOOD. ONLY the Blood of GOD himself could redeem mankind. It is the cornerstone of the Christian faith. So, i am not " crossing the line". i am believing on him the way it is PLAIN in the scripture.

JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD!

in my opinion....... any thing less, and " your crossing the line"!:p
 

Islam

Member
This is your idea of God? God is comparing man to him and says:

Job 25:4-6 (New King James Version)

4 How then can man be righteous before God?
Or how can he be pure who is born of a woman?
5 If even the moon does not shine,
And the stars are not pure in His sight,
6 How much less man, who is a maggot,
And a son of man, who is a worm?&#8221;


So you're saying that God considered himself a maggot and a worm?!?!
This is crossing the line my friend.


Numbers 23:19 (King James Version)
http://www.biblegateway.com/bg_vers...blegateway.com/bg_versions/bgclick.php?what=2

19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

God is telling you he's not a man yet you say he is!

As for Jesus shedding his blood and the entire ressurection crusifiction thing:
please read:
http://www.ahmed-deedat.co.za/Books/books/christ.html

Why did Jesus have to die? Because of the original sin. Well I tell you that itself is a lie. If your father steals we cant send you to jail can we? So why would God do that?

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son (the progeny of Adam) shall not bear the iniquity of the father (Adam), neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die." Ezekiel 18:20-21

Please tell me, which is more rational, Islam which says you are responsible for what you do, God judges you by your deeds and if you sin you repent and he forgives you, or, God killing his son in order to forgive you for sins you never commited?
 

porkchop

I'm Heffer!!!



Numbers 23:19 (King James Version)


19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

I have never seen such a blatant attempt to take something out of context as this!!! Laughable, just laughable!!! :biglaugh: :biglaugh:
Rocka, its not even worth aurguing with this person who has such an obvious disrigard for the Word of God. From this statement alone that he/she have put, you have clearly won the debate.
 

porkchop

I'm Heffer!!!
jmoum said:
Really? Then it should be no difficult task for you to refute every last point that has been laid out in this entire thread beyond a shadow of a doubt. Can you?

Yup, but then its not my debate, is it?
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
porkchop said:

I have never seen such a blatant attempt to take something out of context as this!!! Laughable, just laughable!!! :biglaugh: :biglaugh:
Rocka, its not even worth aurguing with this person who has such an obvious disrigard for the Word of God. From this statement alone that he/she have put, you have clearly won the debate.
"And the LORD met Balaam, and put a word in his mouth, and said, Go again unto Balak, and say thus.
And when he came to him, behold, he stood by his burnt offering, and the princes of Moab with him. And Balak said unto him, What hath the LORD spoken?
And he took up his parable, and said, Rise up, Balak, and hear; hearken unto me, thou son of Zippor:
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
Behold, I have received commandment to bless: and he hath blessed; and I cannot reverse it.
He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness in Israel: the LORD his God is with him, and the shout of a king is among them. God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn."

There is the quote in its context. Still says the same thing.
 

James the Persian

Dreptcredincios Crestin
Islam said:
Why did Jesus have to die? Because of the original sin. Well I tell you that itself is a lie. If your father steals we cant send you to jail can we? So why would God do that?

Original sin is a peculiarly western and rather late interpretation. It is not shared by either we or the Oriental Orthodox and yet I constantly seem to see Muslims going on about it as though it is the foundation of Christian faith. Neither it, not the substitutionary atonement idea that derives from it are either the original nor universally held beliefs that Muslim apologists seem to think. Do you have any arguments that might actually work on, say, a Russian or a Copt? Find out something about our faiths (EO and OO) and then come back to me if you think you still have an argument against the Incarnation, because as far as I can see eastern Christian thought on who Christ is and what He achieved is far more coherent and consistent than the Muslim one.

James
 

James the Persian

Dreptcredincios Crestin
*Paul* said:
Look closer at the verse in question (Numbers 23v19), the answer is within the verse itself as is quite often the case. That is why it is so laughable. I agree with Porkchop.

And I agree with both of them also. (Something tells me that this is something that is unlikely to repeat itself all that often with either of them.) If you want to cherry pick quotes from Scripture, though, you can make just about anything you like out of them. I dare say it would be quite simple to 'prove' that Islam was of the devil using the same ploy. Context is key and the context of the quote simply does not support its use as an argument against the Incarnation.

James
 
Top