Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Interfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: Prove that Paul or Muhammad had a Revelation. Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 10 Next >>
Author Message
islamispeace
 Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1942
Quote islamispeace Replybullet Posted: 05 January 2013 at 8:52pm
In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful...

Originally posted by Kish

How hilarious is your reasoning and belief when Jesus came to fulfill the law, is without sin and himself personally appointed Paul, which might I add are ALL part of the canon and authenticity of the Bible Scriptures. Muhammad on the other hand plagiarized that account of Paul to himself but not one person can confirm it, only legendary stories from the hadith, now that is circular reasoning at its BEST! Whereas writers of the New Testament all confirm each other with non-Christian Secular History backing it up.


Here we see Kish just repeating ad nauseum his own personal beliefs without providing any supporting evidence!  Go figure...

Originally posted by Kish

From the beginning you were asked to provide “witnesses” from the Quran, what does Islam do, grabs support from the hadith and say I’m shifting gears, “Hold The Phone!” And then goes on to say this . . .


Earth to Kish: you don't get to tell Muslims from where they can provide evidence.  Muslims use both the Quran and Hadiths. 

What I find hilarious is that Kish does not even believe in either the Quran or the Hadiths, yet he wants Muslims to provide evidence from the Quran and not the Hadiths, even though he rejects both! 

Originally posted by Kish

My friend, if your book is “complete” as U say, you do not need the hadith, it’s that simple. WithOUT, the hadith the Quran is INcomplete!


Again, you don't get to tell us what we need and what we don't need.  As I said, the Quran is not a biography of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).  It's purpose is to teach Muslims how to worship God and live according to His Laws.  With this in mind, it is complete.  All other details, such as the proper interpretation of the Quran or issues regarding the Prophet's life are left for the Hadiths. 

The important point to take away from all this, which you are desperately trying to avoid, is that you asked for witnesses and you got them! 

Not only that, but I surprised you by providing witnesses from both the Quran and Hadiths!  Let's see how you respond.

Originally posted by Kish

And you say Islam = Submit to Allah. What is stopping you now, or do U follow your Quran when it is convenient? Everything points to the scriptures as truth NOT the hadiths or even the Quran for that matter. Allah is here saying that he is a watcher over the scriptures. Did he watch over the scriptures like he said he would or did he allow them to be corrupted? Either-way there is a BIG problem here and you see it, I know U do.  But, then again if they are corrupted how can U judge between them as U are told, please read it again. See the dilemma; I’m not your enemy.  

Sometimes truth is hard to accept.

The verse is saying that Allah (swt) is a watcher over the Quran.  He was not referring to the previous scriptures.  Sheik Kish thinks too much of himself to think that he can tell Muslims what their own scripture says!

Originally posted by Kish

Hmmm, out of his own mouth, long story short nothing Muhammad said the self-appointing messenger of Allah of the Kaaba and not Jehovah the God of Israel is validated. No wonder Islam is so confused when it comes to the Gospel and Torah and blame Jesus and Paul of the Bible. They are only following what Muhammad and Ibn Khazem said. Where did Muhammad get his information from, not the Lord Jehovah but from some spirit that violently choked him until he gave in and then from some so called Christian monks, perhaps anyone would have gave in and done the same under those distressing circumstances.
  

Poor, poor Kish...confounded by his own theory, he now resorts to childish rants.  It seems like Kish is trying hard to convince himself of the "truth" as he sees it. 

Any one can notice how he has desperately tried to divert attention away from the Jesus of the Bible as well as Paul.  Why?  Because he knows that his own theory (about 2 witnesses) puts not only Jesus and Paul, but indeed all of the Biblical prophets in a very bad light!  I guess its proof that Kish puts the cart before the horse (or talks before he thinks)! LOL

Originally posted by Kish

And not its message, that is the sad part. Muslims say they submit but they are more concern with proving who the messenger was by using the hadiths but failed terribly about hearing and believing the MESSAGE of the previous “books” of the Bible the Holy Scriptures!

More Kishian rants aimed at convincing himself!  The real sad part is that Kish masquerades himself as someone who knows what the Quran says, but like most self-appointed pretend-scholars, he has never read it or absorbed its message.  He simply repeats what he has been told since childhood, like an automaton. 

Originally posted by Kish

The Quran tells you to follow the previous scriptures and that you do not follow either, what else can I tell you.

Here goes Sheik Kish again telling us what the Quran says.  No Kish, the Quran does not tell us to "follow the previous scriptures".  Its just another absurd Christian myth.  Maybe you should actually read the Quran before opening your mouth.

Originally posted by Kish

You can use the Veda and hadith if you like I’m not Muslim and both are not part of the Bibles canon. Either way the Quran is incomplete without it!

Regardless of your pathetic arguments, the fact remains that the central question of this thread has been answered.  But as one would expect, your arrogance and blind reasoning have kept you from admitting the truth. 

And here is the funny part.  You said that you don't believe in the Quran (duh!) but here you are asking for "witnesses" from the Quran!  What would be the point if you were provided with these "witnesses"?  Would you say "Alhamdulillah!" and become a Muslim?  It seems like this whole thread was just a pathetic attempt at objectivity.  Unfortunately, there can be no objectivity from one so biased from the beginning!

It is no surprise then that when you were surprised by the witnesses in the Quran, your response was...silence! 

Originally posted by Kish

Read page five of this thread and read Acts 9: 3-12 & 17-22 again. Luke, Theophilus who later became a Christian, Ananias and others accepted the account as factual! No wonder NO ONE disputed the account that Saul/Paul experienced as well as Jesus death. Peter, Barnabas and Jesus Apostles accepted the account and his commission as an Apostle to the nations, which Muhammad again plagiarized to himself.

LOL So, Kish thinks that Luke (a lackey of Paul) and some guy named "Theophilus", who we know nothing about, are the "witnesses" for Paul.  Ooookay! 

Then he mentions Ananias, the other obscure figure who, as claimed by Acts, had an encounter with "the Lord".  Poor Kish does not realize that he now has the little problem of identifying the witnesses for Ananias!  Who were these witnesses I wonder?  Oh right, Paul and Luke!  How nice and convenient that our little circle is complete!

Originally posted by Kish

Paul resurrects Eutychus in Troas in front of eyewitnesses (Acts 20:12), heals a man lame from birth and performed other miracles in front of eyewitnesses (Acts 14:8-18), another proof of him being an Apostle and Prophet of God. Paul prayed and laid his hands on the man, and he was healed. Deeply impressed by this miracle, the local people brought other sick ones to be healed, and they brought gifts to fill the needs of Paul and his companions (Acts 28:7-10)

So, Kish believes these legendary stories and then on his authority says the following:

Originally posted by Kish

Ordinary men like Muhammad cannot do these things but instead have to think up stories from the hadith which came after Muhammad's death to convince his followers that they really happened.

Wow!  Biased much, Kish?  Isn't it amazing that you believe one set of alleged miracles and reject another?  I guess it should not be surprising since we are dealing with a Christian apologist who has already made up his mind and will not answer to reason. 

Kish also conveniently forgets the little problem of contradictions in the account of Paul's first encounter as well as his false prophecy about Jesus' second coming and teaching of a doctrine different from that of all the previous prophets.  Obviously, even if Paul had performed thousands of miracles, these all go down the drain if he made just one false prophecy or taught a different doctrine than that of Jesus (pbuh).  If that is the case, which the evidence shows, then his so-called "miracles" (if they even occurred) could just have been the work of a false prophet, as Jesus himself allegedly warned:

"For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time." (Matthew 24:24-25)

Originally posted by Kish

As you can see Paul had many witnesses even eye-witnesses to confirm his account and teachings during and after his death and that Jesus and God were backing him up!  

Luke 1: 3,4 3 I (Luke) resolved also, because I have traced all things from the start with accuracy, to write them in logical order to you, most excellent The·oph′i·lus, 4 that you may know fully the certainty of the things that you have been taught orally

Acts 1:1, 3 The first account, O The·oph′i·lus, I composed about all the things Jesus started both to do and to teach . . . To these also by many positive proofs he showed himself alive after he had suffered, being seen by them throughout forty days and telling the things about the kingdom of God

Like it or not, no one can prove these events did not take place because many eyewitnesses saw it and wrote about it and accepted it. The accuracy of the book of Acts has been verified over the years by a number of archaeological discoveries

Acts of Apostles was accepted without question as inspired Scripture and canonical by Scripture catalogers from the second through the fourth centuries C.E. Portions of the book, along with fragments of the four Gospels, are found in the Chester Beatty No. 1 papyrus manuscript (P45) of the third century C.E. The Michigan No. 1571 manuscript (P38) of the third or fourth century contains portions of chapters 18 and 19, and a fourth-century manuscript, Aegyptus No. 8683 (P8), contains parts of chapters 4 through 6. The book of Acts was quoted from by Polycarp of Smyrna about 115 C.E., by Ignatius of Antioch about 110 C.E., and by Clement of Rome perhaps as early as 95 C.E. Athanasius, Jerome, and Augustine of the fourth century all confirm the earlier listings that included Acts.

More outside sources for your benefit not mines. - Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian recognizing the writings comprising the Christian Scriptures as carrying authority equal to that of the Hebrew Scriptures. Irenaeus in appealing to the Scriptures makes no fewer than 200 quotations from Paul’s letters. Clement says he will answer his opponents by “the Scriptures which we believe are valid from their omnipotent authority,” that is, “by the law and the prophets, and besides by the blessed Gospel.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. II, p. 409, “The Stromata, or Miscellanies.”

As Paul’s associate, Luke recorded their travels. He also spoke to eyewitnesses. These factors and thorough research make his writings a masterpiece as far as historical accuracy is concerned.

Scholar William Ramsay could therefore say: “Luke is a historian of the first rank: not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy, he is possessed of the true historic sense . . . This author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.”

I don’t expect you to know, understand or accept any of this since you was told not to and you blindly followed without doing your own research but it was part of the bible canon long before Muhammad came on the scene.

All this was completed under great persecution from the Romans and Jews and the Christians were very small in number but nothing is impossible for Jehovah, the God of the heavens!

  

More copying by the lazy Kish who does not do his own research and yet criticizes others for not doing "your own research". Clap

By the way, isn't it strange that a man who never even met Jesus (except for the couple of minutes in Damascus) went on to become the single most important figure in Christianity, so much so that most of the Christian canon is made up of books that were either written by him or his followers (and some that were forged in his name)?! Shocked 

Originally posted by Kish

Are we going to go through all of the characters of the Bible, it still would not convince you.

SO, before Muhammad can even past the test of a prophet he first has to be a servant of the God of Abraham, Isaac AND of Jacob which he is not, how do we know?

What have we found regarding Muhammad and his spurious teachings thus far? The basic components are missing from the Quran that the Torah and Injil have to confirm each others written.


Kish is confounded!  He still will not answer the question and instead goes off on tangents.  So to repeat:

Who was the "angel" that appeared to Mary to announce to her the birth of Jesus (pbuh)?

This angel did not identify itself.  Only Luke identified it as Gabriel (as).  Hoe delightful that Kish has been ensnared by his own handiwork! Big%20smile

Remember...this is your own theory being used against you!  Poor Kish...hoisted by his own petard!

Originally posted by Kish

If the God of Muhammad and of the Quran Allah, is not the same God of the Holy Scriptures, Jehovah and of Moses how can Muhammad even begin to past the test of a true Prophet.


LOL We are back to that again?  This has already been explained.  If you are too dense and blinded by your own arrogance to understand, that is your problem.  As the gentleman in the Youtube video mentioned, people like Kish belong to a "sick cult".  How horrified they will be when they stand in front of the Lord of the Worlds on the Day of Judgment and are reminded of their blasphemy! Shocked That will surely be a day of much groaning! 
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

IP IP Logged
Webber
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 December 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 128
Quote Webber Replybullet Posted: 05 January 2013 at 9:32pm
Originally posted by islamispeace

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful...

Originally posted by Webber

Sorry but I fail to see how you have convinced Kish of anything. I know you believe it to the fullest extent yourself so proof is as easy as an Arabic word, (most of which have many meanings). This looks like a case of proving it to yourself over and over and getting frustrated when your twos and two don’t make fours in the eyes of others. There are reasons for that. In the same way you cannot convince me by your arguments that Paul was not a Prophet.


LOL Well, what a shock that a Christian feels that my arguments are not very "convincing"!  I think that you are actually just projecting your own insecurities onto me.

Originally posted by Webber

Contradictory? One account mentions the companions heard but did not see anything. (How’s your spiritual vision doing?) Another says  couldn’t  see anything, (possibly because of a bright light?) Another says they fell to the ground. Do the first two accounts say they did not fall to the ground? K, noticed the variations, missed the contradictions. People like to mix them up lots.


This is a typical Christian apologetic argument, aimed at reconciling the differing detail in the three accounts. 

The first account states that the companions did not see anyone and makes no mention of a bright light.  The second account states that the companions saw a bright light.  This certainly looks like a contradiction to me!  Moreover, since you like to use the KJV, the contradictions are even more obvious:

"And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink." (Acts 9:7-9)

This account says that the men heard a voice but no one.

"And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.

11 And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus." (Acts 22:9-11)

This account states that they saw a light but did not hear the voice!

Originally posted by Webber

This is an old Muslim criticism. All NT accounts must be exact yet the 7 variations of the Quranic account  of Sodom and Gomorrah should not be questioned. It’s a double standard.

And this is an old Christian tactic: when in doubt, divert attention to an unrelated issue.

Originally posted by Webber

Clearly you are into the NIV and its updated opinions. Read the KJV and you will note how Paul always separates God from Jesus. I suppose nobody ever said Praise Allah and Muhammad in the same sentence before?
  

Using the same KJV, we see the contradictions in Acts regarding Paul's encounter. 

Here is how the KJV translates 1 Corinthians 1:2-3:

"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:

Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ."

There is little difference between the KJV and the NIV here.  Both tell Christians to call upon the name of Jesus "their lord and ours".  

Originally posted by Webber

Jesus said “Behold I come quickly” Jesus meant when He comes it will be quick; Paul’s prophesy was not about “Cool, we’ll see ya tomorrow” but about on the day it would happen. Where does Paul tell them they will all live until that day? Wishful thinking I’d say and same for every generation since that has sculpted the verses to believe it meant in their lifetime

Another typical response.  Let's see the verses again:

"According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. 18 Therefore encourage one another with these words." (NIV, 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18)

"For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words." (KJV)

There can be little doubt what Paul is saying here.  Christians can try to dance around it all they want, but it is clear that Paul was expecting Jesus' return within a short amount of time.

Originally posted by Webber

I find it odd you would use the words of another author, (John) as an argument against Paul. On the surface they seem to agree, not contradict, but it’s irrelevant to your argument. How did you miss that?

What's so "odd" about it?  I referred to 1 John to prove further that the early Christians were expecting the return of Jesus in their lifetimes, just like Paul.  Whoever wrote 1 John shared Paul's belief that Jesus was returning soon. 

Originally posted by Webber

John’s talk was a warning based on the appearance of anti-christs cast to the earth, which is what happened and remains even until this “hour”.  Not something Muslims want to get into, they’d rather say it’s all about the Jinn.

John's "warning" was meant to tell Christians that the end was near.  That is why he said "it is the last hour". 

Originally posted by Webber

So what happens to a prophet that prophesies about the end time that isn’t going to happen until the end time? Would you not want to put them to death cuz it didn’t happen in your lifetime? John died of old age.

First of all, scholars generally agree that the author of 1 John was not "John".  As Ehrman notes:

"The letters 1, 2, and 3 John sound in many ways like the Gospel of John, but they are strikingly different as well, especially in the historical context they presuppose.  They were probably not written by the same author, who was not John the son of Zebedee in any event, but by a later Christian living in the same community." [Forged: Writing in the Name of God - Why the Bible's Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are, p. 229]

Second, the reason "John" was not killed for being a false prophet was because the letter was written anonymously.  Also, this author was simply repeating the belief of the Christian community at large.

Anonymity was a common phenomenon in early Christianity.  The number of anonymous writings in the New Testament is remarkable.  As Ehrman notes:

"None of the Gospels tells us the names of its author. [...] Also anonymous are the book of Acts and the letters known as 1, 2, and 3 John.  Technically speaking, the same is true of the book of Hebrews; the author never mentions his name, even if he wants you to assume he's Paul." [Ibid., p. 23]

Originally posted by Webber

These arguments are not your own. They are age old and refuted many times. I would even venture to guess your training on this has been more Google than from sitting and listening to your Imam. 

LOL Oh that's rich.  "Googling" actually seems to be the main tactic of Christians such as yourself.  I tend to rely on journals and books written by actual experts.

Originally posted by Webber

On the other side of the coin…Using the NIV in your arguments will mess up a lot of “Christians” who do not know their own scripture. ;)  

You don't seem to know your scripture that well either, let alone whether it is the NIV or KJV, as I showed above. Big%20smile

You have got to be kidding. He said typical Muslim so I get to say typical Christian. It's that narcissistic idocy that makes me think the only Paul you studied was Paul Reubens. "I know you are but what am I?"

Your aggressive and sarcastic style tends to speak against islam being that peaceful.
Mind if I debate a while with the real Muslims?

 




I'm a Gentile.
Numb. 6:24-26
IP IP Logged
iec786
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 February 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 463
Quote iec786 Replybullet Posted: 06 January 2013 at 3:38am
PAUL : On his own admittance being cunning, used deceit:
"But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I
CAUGHT YOU WITH GUILE." 2 CORINTHIANS 12:16
IP IP Logged
islamispeace
 Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1942
Quote islamispeace Replybullet Posted: 06 January 2013 at 11:48am
Originally posted by Webber

You have got to be kidding. He said typical Muslim so I get to say typical Christian. It's that narcissistic idocy that makes me think the only Paul you studied was Paul Reubens. "I know you are but what am I?"
Your aggressive and sarcastic style tends to speak against islam being that peaceful.
Mind if I debate a while with the real Muslims?


And yet again, you fail to offer a substantive rebuttal and instead resort to ad hominem attacks and melodrama.  Do you have anything to say about the contradictions in Acts about Paul's encounter?  The KJV is pretty clear.  It was your idea to rely on the KJV, was it not?

I guess referring to my response as "narcissistic idiocy" serves as a valid response in your mind.  Oh well...

Also, one has to wonder what my rebuttal has to do with Islam and peace? Confused
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

IP IP Logged
Kish
 
Guest Group
Guest Group
Avatar

Joined: 07 July 2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 237
Quote Kish Replybullet Posted: 06 January 2013 at 10:14pm

Originally posted by rational

You can try and shake our foundation all you want . . .

Hey Newbie, what foundation does Islam has? Everything in the Q was barrowed; starting with some spirit who angrily chocked Muhammad who he later thought was Gabriel which is your belief and I don’t knock it. But, it’s not part of the authenticity of the Holy Scriptures and goes against the role of the angel Gabriel. Also, the Q’s teachings contradict ALL the prophets, starting with Moses (the story of Pharaoh and the Red sea, Abraham and who in Noah’s family survived the flood) and ending with Revelation.

Originally posted by Kish

Six Major Points in Islam the Quran fails to Mention

 

1)    The Quran does not mention that Ishmael was the child to be sacrificed by Abraham

 

2)    The Quran does not mention that Muhammad was the promised seed of Abraham

 

3)    The Quran does not mention that a covenant was made with Ishmael by God

 

4)    The Quran does not mention ONE person who witnessed, confirmed or testified that Muhammad’s Revelation in the cave of Hi’ra was a TRUE event, according to the Law of Moses.

 

5)    The Quran does not mention the God of Muhammad (Allah) as a father and having a son (Sura 4:171) as does the God of Jesus (YHWH/JHVH = Yahweh/Jehovah) (Matt. 3:17)

 

6) The Quran does not mention God’s name as Yahweh or Jehovah as did ALL the other books of the prophets in the Bible

 

If the God of Muhammad and of the Quran Allah, is not the same God of the Holy Scriptures, Jehovah and of Moses how can Muhammad even begin to past the test of a true Prophet.

Whatever foundation Islam think it has is certainly not based on the Torah and the Injil although ISLAM’S book inaccurately makes mention of them.
IP IP Logged
Webber
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 December 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 128
Quote Webber Replybullet Posted: 07 January 2013 at 12:15pm
Hi Islamispeace.
First let me apologize for getting cranked. That's the person I was, not the person I want to be. It was a jerk reaction to some of your responses but in no way do I think you are an *****. The fact that we can read the same thing and come away with different meanings is what's caused so much division to begin with. Unless we decide to post Did not, did so back and forth we may have to agree we've hit an impasse. Just for your reading pleasure let me add a couple things.

There are a few scenarios that could be reason as to why the stories are different, none of which would I imagine you would believe. Your NIV expands on the second account to say they didn’t understand the voice as opposed to not hearing it. Let’s not forget these witnesses were not, nor did they become Christians. Once they dropped off Paul they were out of the picture. They were no doubt more of a goon squad which travelled with Paul for the express purpose of getting in on some of the action. Once back home I doubt they would admit to more than they had to for the simple reason they’d be persecuted as well.  In that case there wouldn’t be much use in Paul continuing to insist they saw and heard everything.  

I didn’t bring up the Quranic accounts of Sodom and Gomorrah to discredit the Quran but to show that variations happen.  I’m sure you prefer the version that says Paul lied about everything but that isn’t consistent with his ministry.

In response to your comment, "Here is how the KJV translates 1 Corinthians 1:2-3: Both tell Christians to call upon the name of Jesus "their lord and ours".  "

I know, some Christians pray to Jesus, which is because of their belief He was God so it doesn’t matter but that isn’t what Paul meant so yeah, I’m not seeing a lot wrong with what he wrote. 

Because of our differences in other stuff we believe I’m not sure I could explain it to you in a way you would understand let alone believe, but here’s a quick shot at it.

There is much power in the very name of Jesus. It can be pivotal in the outcome of many events that happen daily in some cases dependant on the evil you have around you… (me).  The devil doesn’t bother those that don’t bother him but I’m a constant annoyance to him. When I say “devil” I’m not actually meaning the one and only, and I wouldn’t give him any credit for being omni-anything, nor is he in control of all evil.

Like Paul said in his letter to the Ephesians, “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”

Paul then goes on to explain how the full armour of God is essential, and that he is sending Tychicus to explain the rest. Unfortunate Tychicus didn’t write an epistle, letter, even a note on the subject. Maybe we’ll find it in a cave someday.

John knew about this as well. He also knew this new evil in the world had influenced some of those who were preachers, maybe even apostles, causing them to become false prophets already. Obviously he didn’t think there was only one hour left to life, the command that went with it was for the chruch to remain steadfast in the truth.  “The last hour” is an expression John also used at the crucifixion.

Whether Paul’s “we” meant himself and the Thessalonians only, or note to all Christians in general is a matter of interpretation. Either way I don’t believe neither Paul nor John would have imagined that 2000 years would go by. Many since have also believed the last day will be within their lifetime, but here we still are.

I'm going to have to leave it here for now. Duty calls and somebody has to pay my mortgage.

I'm a Gentile.
Numb. 6:24-26
IP IP Logged
honeto
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 March 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2397
Quote honeto Replybullet Posted: 07 January 2013 at 3:04pm
Kish,
Islamic teachings are from God Almighty.
I am sure previous scriptures and teachings have their base in God Almighty as well. The thing is that in their present form NT and OT are greatly in disagreement with each other, and that is a bigger problem in fact.
God, Jesus, and Salvation: The NT and OT are like day and night they contradict on those and other issues between each other.
So, logically it is funny that how you combine them two to present your case against Islam yet they disagree with each other, BIG TIME!
:)
Hasan

Edited by honeto - 07 January 2013 at 3:11pm
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"
IP IP Logged
Kish
 
Guest Group
Guest Group
Avatar

Joined: 07 July 2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 237
Quote Kish Replybullet Posted: 07 January 2013 at 8:37pm

Originally posted by honeto

Islamic teachings are from God Almighty.

If you are referring to the God of Abraham, that’s incorrect “Based on the six points of Islam that the Quran fails to mention and or agree with.”

Originally posted by honeto

The thing is that in their present form NT and OT are greatly in disagreement with each other,

The NT agrees with the OT and supports and affirms every word of the Prophets.  In fact to establish the identity of the Messiah Scripturally, the apostles and Jesus himself quoted more frequently from the prophecy of Isaiah than from any other Bible book. Still, the book of Isaiah was not the only one to foretell the future. Many other Hebrew Scripture prophecies also find fulfillment in Jesus birth, death and resurrection.

Not so with the Quran, it disagrees with everything about Jesus



Edited by Kish - 07 January 2013 at 8:39pm
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 10 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com