Jump to content
Islamic Forum
andalusi

Muslim-Christian Debate, Here

Recommended Posts

Well this seems to be it. Well here's a quote by a Jewish rabbi after reading a Muslim vs Christian debate over this passage.

 

"A question is raised in Midrash yalkut shimoni as to what the phrase "a prophet like Moshe means" since in Devarim (Deuteronomy) chapter 34 v10 it states "never again has a prophet arisen in israel like Moshe, whom Hahem has known face to face.. וְלֹא קָם נָבִיא עוֹד בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל כְּמֹשֶׁה אֲשֶׁר יְדָעוֹ יְ־הֹוָ־ה פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים" Thus this prophet cannot be like Moshe in his level of prophecy since it will never be equalled but will b like Moshe in other ways.

 

This prophet is generally seen as being Yirmiyahu(Jeremiah). The gematria of the phrase (in hebrew each letter has a number value) "navi akim lahem" (I will establish a prophet for them) is the same as the gematria of the phrase "zehu Yirmiyahu" (This is Yirmiyahu). The Midrash in "Pesikta derav kahana" as well as Midrash Yalkut Shimoni list 6 ways iun which Yirmiyahu was like Moshe to show how this is fulfilled:

1) They both prophesised for the whole of Bnei Yisrael for 40 years

2) They both prophesised to the entire nation- unlike some of the prophets who prophesised after the splitting of the Kingdom and only prophesised to one section

3) Moshe was thrown into the river, Yormiyahu into the pit

4) Moshe was pulled out of the river by the slave of Pharoah's daughter; Yirmiyahu was pulled from the pit by a slave

5) Both admonished the nation

 

Note: Jesus is completely and utterly meaningless in Judaism. he is NOT seen as a prophet, a Rabbi (impossible since there were no Rabbis in his time the title only starting after the destruction of the Second Temple) or even as a teacher. Obviously he is not seen as being divine or the mashiach as anyway- and anyone claming he is, is not Jewish and is not practicing the Jewish religion. Mohammed is just as irrelevant as jesus- and could not be the subject of this verse as he was never Jewish and thus is not qualified to fall under this prophecy,"

 

To me whether is Jesus or Jeremiah it does not matter. As the rabbi says the prophesied prophet would be from their brothers. In Deuteronomy brethren always referred to their fellow Jews. Examples.

 

If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thy heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother. (Deuteronomy 15:7)

 

The priests the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with israel: They shall eat the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and his inheritance. Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren: the LORD is their inheritance, as he hath said unto them. (Deuteronomy 18:1-2)

 

So whoever the prophecy was about it was not Muhammad.

 

compare that with this analysis if it is really muhammed or not

 

What does the Bible say about Muhammad? by Sheikh Ahmed Deedat

May 30, 2008

 

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

 

The subject of this evening’s talk – “What the Bible says about Muhammad” will no doubt come as a surprise to many of you because the speaker is a Muslim. How does it come about that a Muslim happens to be expounding prophecies from the Jewish and Christian Scriptures?

As a young man, about 30 years ago, I attended a series of religious lectures by a Christian theologian, a certain Rev. Hiten, at the “Theater Royal”, Durban in South Africa.

Pope or Kissinger?

This Reverend gentleman was expounding Biblical prophecies. He went on to prove that the Christian Bible foretold the rise of Soviet Russia, and the Last Days. At one stage he went to the extent of proving that his Holy Book did not leave even the Pope out of its predictions. He expatiated vigorously in order to convince his audience that the Beast 666 mentioned in The Book of Revelation, the last book of the New Testament, was the Pope, who was the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Christian scholars are ingenious and indefatigable in their efforts to prove their case. Rev. Hiten’s lectures led me to ask that if the Bible foretold so many things – not even excluding the “Pope” and “israel”, – then surely it must have something to say about the greatest benefactor of mankind, prophet Muhammad, may the peace of Allah be upon him.

As a youngster I set out to search for an answer. I met priest after priest, attended lectures, and read everything that I could lay my hands relating to the fields of Bible prophecies. Tonight I’m going to narrate to you one of these interviews with a Dominee of the Dutch Reformed Church.

Lucky Thirteen

I was invited to the Transvaal (South Africa) to deliver a talk on the occasion of the birthday of the prophet Muhammad. Knowing that in that province of the Republic, the Afrikaans language is widely spoken, even by my own people, I felt that I ought to acquire a smattering of this language so as to feel a little “at home” with the people. I opened the telephone directory and began phoning the Afrikaans-speaking Churches. I indicated my purpose to the priests that I was interested in having a dialogue with them, but they all refused my request with “plausible” excuses.

No. 13 was my lucky number. The thirteenth call brought me pleasure and relief. A Dominee Van Heerden (“Dominee” is the Afrikaans equivalent of “priest”) agreed to meet me at his home on the Saturday afternoon that I was to leave for Transvaal.

He received me on his verandah with a friendly welcome. He said if I did not mind, he would like his father-in- law from the Free State, a 70 year old man, to join us in the discussion. I did not mind. The three of us settled down in the Dominee’s library.

Why Nothing?

I posed the question: “What does the Bible say about Muhammad?” Without hesitation he answered: “Nothing!” I asked: “Why nothing? According to your interpretation the Bible has so many things to say about the rise of Soviet Russia and about the Last Days and even about the Pope of the Roman Catholics?” He said: “Yes, but there was nothing about Muhammad!” I asked again: “Why nothing? Surely this man Muhammad who had been responsible for the bringing into being a world-wide community of millions of believers who, on his authority, believe in:

the miraculous birth of Jesus,

that Jesus is the Messiah,

that he gave life to the dead by God’s permission, and that he healed those born blind and the lepers by God’s permission.

Surely this book (the Bible) must have something to say about this great leader of men who spoke so well of Jesus and his mother Mary?”

The old man from the Free State replied: “My son, I have been reading the Bible for the past 50 years, and if there was any mention of him, I would have known it.”

Not One by Name!

I inquired: “According to you, are there not hundreds of prophecies regarding the coming of Jesus in the Old Testament.” The Dominee interjected: “Not hundreds, but thousands!” I said: “I am not going to dispute the thousand and one prophecies in the Old Testament regarding the coming of Jesus Christ, because the whole Muslim world has already accepted him without the testimony of any Biblical prophecy. Muslims have accepted the de facto Jesus on the authority of Muhammad alone, and there are in the world today no less than 900,000,000 followers of Muhammad, who love, respect, and revere Jesus Christ as a great Messenger of God without having the Christians to convince them by means of Biblical dialectics.

Out of the ‘thousands’ of prophecies referred to, can you please give me just one single prophecy where Jesus is mentioned by name? The term Messiah, translated as Christ, is not a name but a title. Is there a single prophecy where it says that the name of the Messiah will be Jesus, and that his mother’s name will be Mary, that his supposed father will be Joseph the Carpenter; that he will be born in the reign of Herod the King, etc? No! There are no such details! Then how can you conclude that those ‘Thousand’ prophecies refer to Jesus, peace be upon him?”

What is Prophecy?

The Dominee replies: “You see, prophecies are word pictures of something that is going to happen in the future. When that thing actually comes to pass, we see vividly in these prophecies the fulfillment of what had been predicted in the past.” I said: “What you actually do is that you deduce, you reason, you put two and two together.” He said: “Yes.” I said: “If this is what you have to do with a ‘thousand’ prophecies to justify your claim with regards to the genuineness of Jesus, why should we not adopt the very same system for Muhammad?” The Dominee agreed that it was a fair proposition, a reasonable way of dealing with the problem.

I asked him to open up Deuteronomy, chapter 18, verse 18, which he did. I read from memory the verse in Afrikaans, because this was my purpose in having a little practice with the language of the ruling race in South Africa.

“N Profeet sal ek vir hulle verwek uit die midde van hulle broers, soos jy is, en ek sal my woorde in sy mond le, en hy sy sal aan hulle se alle wat ekhom beveel.” (Deut 18:18)

The English translation reads as follows:

“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” (Deut 18:18)

Prophet Like Moses

Having recited the verse in Afrikaans, I apologized for my uncertain pronunciation; the Dominee assured me that I was doing fine. I inquired: “To whom does this prophecy refer?” Without the slightest hesitation he answered: “Jesus!” I asked: “Why Jesus? his name is not mentioned here” The Dominee replied: “Since prophecies are word pictures of something that is going to happen in the future, we find that the wordings of this verse adequately describe him. You see, the most important words of this prophecy are ‘soos jy is’, ‘like unto thee’, or ‘like you’ – like Moses; and Jesus is like Moses.”

I asked the Dominee: “In which way is Jesus like Moses?” The answer was: “In the first place Moses was a Jew and Jesus was also a Jew; secondly, Moses was a Prophet and Jesus was also a Prophet – therefor Jesus is like Moses and that is exactly what God had foretold Moses – ‘soos jy is’.”

“Can you think of any other similarities between Moses and Jesus?” I asked. The Dominee said that he could not think of any. I replied: “If these are the only two criteria for discovering a candidate for this prophecy of Deuteronomy 18:18, then in that case the criteria could fit any one of the following Biblical personages after Moses:- Solomon, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Malachi, John the Baptist etc., because they were also all Jews as well as Prophets. Why should we not apply this prophecy to any one of these prophets, and why only to Jesus?” The Dominee had no reply. I continued: “You see, my conclusions are that Jesus is most unlike Moses, and if I am wrong I would like you to correct me.”

Three Unlike

So staying, I reasoned with him: “In the first place Jesus is not like Moses, because, according to you, Jesus is God, but Moses is not God, is this true?” He said: “Yes.” I said: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses!”. “Secondly, according to you, Jesus died for the sins of the world, but Moses did not have to die for the sins of the world. Is this true?” He again said: “Yes.” I said: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses!”. “Thirdly, according to you, Jesus went to Hell for three days, but Moses did not have to go there. Is this true?” He answered meekly: “Y-e-s!” I concluded: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses!”. “But Dominee,..” I continued: “..these are not hard, solid facts, they are mere matters of belief over which the little ones can stumble and fall. Let us discuss something very simple, very easy that if the little ones are called in to hear the discussion, would have no difficulty following it, shall we?” The Dominee was quiet happy at the suggestion.

Father and Mother

“Moses had a father and a mother. Muhammad also had a father and a mother. But Jesus had only a mother, and no human father. Is this true?” He said: “Yes.” I said: “Daarom is Jesus nie soos Moses nie, maar Muhammad is soos Moses!” Meaning: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses, but Muhammad is like Moses!” (By now the reader will realize that I was using the Afrikaans language only for practice purposes. I shall discontinue its use in this narration).

Miraculous Birth

“Moses and Muhammad were born in the normal, natural course, i.e. the physical association of man and woman; but Jesus was created by a special miracle. You will recall that we are told in the Gospel of St. Matthew 1:18 “..before they came together, (Joseph the Carpenter and Mary) she was found with child by the Holy Ghost.” And St. Luke tells us that when the good news of the birth of a holy son was announced to her, Mary reasoned: “How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the highest shall overshadow thee”(Luke 1:35).

The Holy Quran confirms the miraculous birth of Jesus, in nobler and sublimer terms. In answer to her logical question:

‘O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?’ The angel says in reply: ‘Even so, Allah createth what He willeth: when He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it ‘Be’, and it is’ (the Holy Quran, 3:47).

It is not necessary for God to plant a seed in man or animal. He merely wills it and it comes into being. This is the Muslim conception of the of birth of Jesus. (When I compared the Quran and the Biblical versions of the birth of Jesus to the head of the Bible Society in our largest city, and when I inquired: “Which version would you prefer to give your daughter, the Quranic version or the Biblical version?” The man bowed his head and answered: “The Quranic.”)(see Christ in Islam for the author).

In short, I said to the Dominee: “Is it true that Jesus was born miraculously as against the natural birth of Moses and Muhammad?” He replied proudly: “Yes!” I said: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses, but Muhammad is like Moses. And God says to Moses in the Book of Deuteronomy 18:18 ‘Like unto thee’, ‘Like You’, like Moses and Muhammad is like Moses.”

Marriage Ties

“Moses and Muhammad married and had children, but Jesus remained a bachelor all his life. Is this true?” The Dominee said: “Yes.” I said: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses, but Muhammad is like Moses.”

Jesus Rejected by his People

“Moses and Muhammad were accepted as prophets by their people in their very lifetime. No doubt the Jews gave endless trouble to Moses and they murmured in the wilderness, but as a nation, they acknowledged that Moses was a Messenger of God sent to them. The Arabs too made Muhammad’s life impossible. He suffered very badly at their hands. After 13 years of preaching in Mecca, he had to emigrate from the city of his birth. But before his demise, the Arab nation as a whole accepted him as the Messenger of Allah. But according to the Bible, “He (Jesus) Came unto his own, but his own revived him not”(John 1:11). And even today, after two thousand years, his people, the Jews, as a whole, have rejected him. Is this true?” The Dominee said: “Yes.” I said: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses, but Muhammad is like Moses.”

“Other Worldly” Kingdom

“Moses and Muhammad were prophets as well as kings. A prophet means a man who receives Divine Revelation for the Guidance of man and this Guidance he conveys to God’s creatures as received without any addition or deletion. A king is a person who has the power of life and death over his people. It is immaterial whether the person wears a crown or not, or whether he was ever addressed as king or monarch: if the man has the prerogative of inflicting capital punishment, he is a king. Moses possessed such a power. Do you remember the israelite who was found picking up firewood on Sabbath Day, and Moses had him stoned to death? (Numbers 15:13). There are other crimes also mentioned in the Bible for which capital punishment was inflicted on the Jews at the behest of Moses. Muhammad too, had the power of life and death over his people. There are instances in the Bible of persons who were given gift of prophecy only, but they were not in a position to implement their directives. Some of these holy men of God who were helpless in the face of stubborn rejection of their message, were the prophets Lot, Jonah, Daniel, Ezra, and John the Baptist. They could only deliver the message, but could not enforce the Law. Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, also belonged to this category.

The Christian Gospel clearly confirms this. When Jesus was dragged before the Roman Governor, Pontius Pilate, charged for sedition, Jesus made a convincing point in his defense to refute the false charge: Jesus answered: “My Kingdom is not of this world. If my Kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now is my Kingdom not from hence”(John 18:36).

This convinced Pilate (a pagan) that though Jesus might not be in full possession of his mental faculty, he did not strike him as being a danger to his rule. Jesus claimed a spiritual Kingdom only; in other words he only claimed to be a prophet. Is this true?” The Dominee answered: “Yes.” I said: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses but Muhammad is like Moses.”

No New Laws

“Moses and Muhammad brought new laws and new regulations for their people. Moses not only gave the Ten Commandments to the israelites, but a very comprehensive ceremonial law for the guidance of his people. Muhammad comes to a people steeped in ignorance. They married their step-mothers and buried their daughters alive; drunkenness, idolatry, and gambling were the order of the day. There was hardly anything to distinguish between the ‘man’ and the ‘animal’ of the time. From this abject ignorance, Muhammad elevated the Arabs, in the words of Thomas Carlysle, ‘Into torch-bearers of light and learning. To the Arab nation it was as a birth from darkness into light. Arabia first became alive by means of it. A poor shepherd people, roaming unnoticed in its deserts since the creation of the world. See, the unnoticed becomes world notable, the small has grown world-great. Within one century afterwards Arabia was at Granada on one hand and at Delhi on the other. Glancing in valor and splendor, and the light of Genius, Arabia shines over section of the world..’. The fact is that Muhammad gave his people a Law and Order they never had before. As regards Jesus, when the Jews felt suspicious of him that he might be an impostor with designs to pervert their teachings. Jesus took pains to assure them that he had not come with a new religion – no new laws and no new regulations. I quote his own words: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law of the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot of one title shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.’(Mathew 5:17-18).

In other words he had not come with any new laws or regulation he came only to fulfill the old law. This what he gave the Jews to understand unless he was speaking with the tongue in his cheek trying to bluff the Jews into accepting him as a man of God and by subterfuge trying to ram a new religion down their throats. No! This Messenger of God would never resort to such foul means to subvert the Religion of God. He himself fulfilled the laws. He observed the commandments of Moses, and he respected the Sabbath. At no time did a single Jew point a finger at him to say: ‘”Why don’t you fast’ or ‘why don’t you wash your hands before you break bread’, which charges they always levied against his disciples, but never against Jesus. This is because as a good Jew he honored the laws of the prophets who preceded him. In short, he had created no new religion and had brought no new law like Moses and Muhammad.”

“Isn’t this true?” I asked the Dominee, and he answered: “Yes.” I said: “Therefore, Jesus is not like Moses but Muhammad is like Moses.”

How they Departed

“Both Moses and Muhammad died natural deaths, but according to Christianity, Jesus was killed on the cross. Is this true?” The Dominee said: “Yes.” I averred: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses but Muhammad is like Moses.”

Heavenly Abode

“Moses and Muhammad both lie buried in earth, but according to you, Jesus is in heaven. Is this true? The Dominee agreed. I said: “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses but Muhammad is like Moses.”

Ishmael the First Born

Since the Dominee was helplessly agreeing with every point, I said: “Dominee, so far what I have done is to prove only one point out of the whole prophecy – that is proving the phrase ‘Like unto thee’ – ‘Like You’, like Moses’. The Prophecy is much more than this single phrase which reads as follows:

‘I will raise them up a prophet from among their bretheren like unto thee..’

The emphasis is on the words “From among their brethren.” Moses and his people, the Jews, are here addressed as a racial entity, as a whole, and as such their brethren would undoubtedly be the Arabs.

Abraham had two wives, Sarah and Hagar. Hagar bore Abraham a son, his first born, ‘..and Abraham called his son’s name, which Hagar bare Ishmael.’ (Genesis 16:15). ‘And Abraham took Ishmael his son..’ (Genesis 17:23). ‘And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.’ (Genesis 17:25).

Up to the age of thirteen Ishmael was the only son of Abraham, then God grants him another son through Sarah, named Isaac, who was very much the junior to his brother Ishmael.

Arabs and Jews

If Ishmael and Isaac are the sons of the same father Abraham, then they are brothers. And so the children of the one are the bretheren of the children of the other. The children of Isaac are the Jews and the children of Ishmael are the Arabs – so they are bretheren to one another. The Bible affirms: ‘And he (Ishmael) shall dwell in the presence of all his bretheren.’ (Genesis 16:12). ‘And he (Ishmael) died in the presence of all his bretheren.” (Genesis 25:18). The children of Isaac are the brethren of the Ishmaelites. In like manner Muhammad is from among the brethren of the israelites because he was a descendant of Ishmael the son of Abraham. This exactly as the prophecy has it – “From among their bretheren” (Deut.18:18).

There the prophecy distinctly mentions that the coming prophet who would be like Moses, must arise not from the Children of israel nor from among themselves, but from among their brethren. Muhammad therefore was among their bretheren!

Words in the Mouth

The prophecy proceeds further: ‘..And I will put my words into his mouth..’ What does it mean when it is said ‘I will put my words in your mouth’? You see, when I asked you (the Dominee) to open Deuteronomy chapter 18, verse 18, at the beginning, and if I had asked you to read, and if you had read, would I be putting my words into your mouth? The Dominee answered: “No.” But, I continued: “If I were to teach you a language like Arabic, about which you have no knowledge, and if I asked you to read or repeat after me what I utter i.e. “Say: ‘He is Allah the One and Only; Allah, the eternal absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; and there is none like unto Him.’ (the Holy Quran 112:1-4) (I read them in Arabic). Would I not be putting these unheard words of a foreign tongue which you utter, into your mouth?” The Dominee agreed that it was indeed so. “In an identical manner”, I said: “The words of the Holy Quran, the Revelation vouchsafed by the Almighty God to Muhammad, were revealed.

History tells us that when Muhammad was forty years of age he was in a cave some three miles north of the City of Mecca. In the cave the Archangel Gabriel commands him in his mother tongue: ‘Eqra!’, which means ‘Read!’, or ‘Recite!’ Muhammad was terrified, and in his bewilderment replied that he was not learned!. The angel commands him a second time with the same result. For the third time the angel continues. Now Muhammad, grasps that what was required of him was to repeat! to rehearse! And he repeats the words as they were put into his mouth:

‘Read! In the Name of the Lord and Charisher, Who Created. Created man from a (mere) clot of congealed blood: Read! and thy Lord is the Most Bountiful, He Who taught (the use of) the pen, taught man that which he new not”. (the Holy Quran 96:1-5).

These are the first five verses which were revealed to Muhammad, which now occupy the beginning of the 96th chapter of the Holy Quran.

The Faithful Witness

When the angel departed, Muhammad rushed to his home. Terrified and sweating all over he asked his wife Khadija to ‘cover-him up!’ He lay down, and she watched by him. When he had regained his composure, he explained to her what he had seen and heard. She assured him of her faith in him and that Allah would not allow any terrible thing to happen to him. Are these the confessions of an impostor? Would impostors confess that when an angel of the Lord confronts them with a Message from on High, they get fear-stricken, terrified, and sweating all over, run home to their wives? Any critic can see that his reactions and confessions are that of an honest, sincere man.

During the next twenty three years of his life, words were ‘put into his mouth’, and he uttered them. They made an indelible impression on his heart and mind; and as the volume of the Sacred Scripture, the Holy Quran, grew, they were recorded on palm-leaf libre, on skins; and in the hearts of his devoted disciples. Before his demise these words were arranged according to his instructions in the order in which we find them today in the Holy Quran.

The words (revelation) were actually put into his mouth, exactly as foretold in the prophecy under discussion: “And I will put my words in his mouth.” (Deut 18:18).

Unlettered Prophet

Muhammad’s experience in the Cave of Hira, and his response to that first Revelation is the exact fulfillment of another Biblical Prophecy. In the Book of Isaiah, chapter 29, verse 12, we read: ‘And the Book is delivered to him that is not learned’ (Isaiah 29:12). ‘The Unlettered prophet’ (the Holy Quran 7:158). And the Biblical verse continues: ‘Saying, read this, I pray thee:’ ‘And he saith, I am not learned.’. ‘I am not learned.’ is the exact translation of the Arabic words which Muhammad uttered twice to the Holy Spirit, the Archangel Gabriel, when he was commanded: ‘Read!’).

Let me quote the verse in full without a break as found in the King James Version, or the Authorized Version as it is more popularly know: ‘And the Book is delivered to him that is no learned, saying: ‘Read this I pray thee’. And he saith: ‘I am not learned.’ (Isaiah 29:12).

Important note : It may be noted that there were no Arabic Bibles in existence in the 6th century of the Christian Era when Muhammad lived and preached. Besides, he was absolutely unlettered and unlearned. He never knew how to read and write Arabic, his own language, let alone knowing a completely different one.

‘He does not speak (aught) of (his own) desire: It is no less than inspiration sent down to him. He was taught by One Mighty in Power’ (the Holy Quran 53:3-5).

Without any human learning, ‘he put to shame the wisdom of the learned’.

Grave Warning

“See!” I told the Dominee, “how the prophecies fit Muhammad like a glove. We do not have to stretch prophecies to justify their fulfillment in Muhammad.” The Dominee replied, “All your expositions sound very well, but they are of no real consequence, because we Christians have Jesus Christ the incarnate God, who has redeemed us from the Bondage of Sin!” I asked: “Not important? God didn’t think so! He had His warnings recorded in the scriptures. God knew that there would be people like you who will light-heartedly discount His words, so He followed up Deuteronomy 18:18 with a dare warning:

‘And it shall come to pass (it is going to happen), that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My Name, I will require if of him.’

(In the Catholic Bible the ending words are ‘I will be the revenger’, ‘I will take revenge!’). “Does not this terrify you? God Almighty is threatening revenge! We shake in our pants if some hoodlum threatens us, yet you have no fear of God’s warning?”

Miracle of Miracles! in the verse 19 of Deuteronomy chapter 18, we have a further fulfillment of the prophecy in Muhammad! Note the words ‘..My words which he shall speak in My Name’. In whose name is Muhammad speaking?” I opened Yusuf Ali’s translation of the Holy Quran, at chapter 114, Surat An-Nas, or The Chapter of Mankind, the last chapter of the Quran, and showed him the formula at the head of the chapter, and the meaning:

‘In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful’.

And the heading of chapter 113, and the meaning: ‘In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful’. And every chapter downwards 112, 111, 110,..was the same formula and the same meaning on every page, because the end surahs (chapters) are short and take about a page each. And what did the prophecy demand? ‘..Which he shall speak in My Name’; and in whose name does Muhammad speak? In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

The Prophecy is being fulfilled in Muhammad to the letter; every chapter of the Holy Quran except the 9th begin with the formula: ‘In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful’. The Muslim begins his every lawful act with the Holy formula. But the Christian begins: ‘In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.’

Concerning Deuteronomy chapter eighteen, I have given you more than 15 reasons as to how this prophecy refers to Muhammad and not to Jesus.

Baptist Contradicts Jesus

In New Testament times, we find that the Jews were still expecting the fulfillment of the prophecy of One like Moses, refer John 1:19-25.

When Jesus claimed to be the Messiah of the Jews, the Jews began to esquire as to where was Elias? The Jews had a parallel prophecy that before the coming of the Messiah, Elias must come first in his second coming. Jesus confirms this Jewish belief:

“Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, that Elias is come already, and they knew him not,.. then the Disciples understood that he spoke unto them of John the Baptist.” (Mathew 17:11-13).

According to the New Testament the Jews were not the ones to swallow the words of any would-be Messiah. In their investigations they underwent intense difficulties in order to find their true Messiah. And this the Gospel of John confirms: “And this is the record of John (the Baptist), when the Jews sent priests and levites from Jerusalem to ask him, ‘Who art thou?’, and he confessed and denied not; but confessed, ‘I am not the Christ’ ” (This was only natural because there can’t be two Messiahs at the same time. If Jesus was the Christ then John couldn’t be the Christ!) “And they asked him: ‘What then? Art thou Elias?’ And he saith: ‘I am not’ ” Here John the Baptist contradicts Jesus! Jesus says that John is Elias and John denies that he is what Jesus ascribes him to be. One of the two (Jesus or John), God forbid!, is definitely not speaking the truth!

On the testimony of Jesus himself, John the Baptist was the greatest of the israelite prophets: “Verily I say unto you, among them that are born of women, there has not risen a greater than John the Baptist” (Matthew 11:11).

We Muslims know John the Baptist as Yahya. We revere him as a true prophet of Allah. The Holy Prophet Jesus known to us as Eesa, is also esteemed as one of the mightiest messenger of the Almighty. How can we Muslims impute lies to either of them? We leave this problem between Jesus and John for the Christians to solve, for their “Sacred Scriptures abound in discrepancies which they have been glossing over as the ‘dark sayings of Jesus’ ” (See the Times Magazine December 30th, 1974, article How true is the Bible?).

We Muslims are really interested in the last questions posed to John the Baptist by the Jewish elite – Art thou that prophet? And he answered, “No.”(John 1:21).

Three Questions!

Please note that three different and distinct questions were posed to John the Baptist, and to which he gave three emphatic No’s as answers. To recapitulate:

“Art thou the Christ?”

“Art thou Elias ?”

“Art thou that Prophet?”

But the learned men of Christendom somehow only see two questions implied here. To make doubly clear that the Jews definitely had three separate prophecies in their minds when they were interrogating John the Baptist. Let us read the remonstrance of the Jews in the verses following:

“And they asked him, and said unto him: ‘Why baptizest thou then, if

thou be not that Christ..

nor Elias..

neither that Prophet ?’ ”

(John 1:25).

The Jews were waiting for the fulfillment of three distinct prophecies: a. the coming of Christ. b. the coming of Elias, and c. the coming of that Prophet.

“That Prophet”

If we look up any Bible which has a concordance or cross-references, then we will find in the marginal note where the words the Prophet, or that Prophet occur in John 1:25, that these words refer to the prophecy of Deuteronomy 18:15 and 18. And that that Prophet – the Prophet like Moses – “Like unto thee”, we have proved through overwhelming evidence that he was Muhammad and not Jesus!

Muslims are not denying that Jesus was the Messiah, which word is translated as Christ. We are not contesting the Thousand and One Prophecies which the Christians claim abound in the Old Testament foretelling the coming of the Messiah. What we say is that Deuteronomy 18:18 does not refer to Jesus Christ but it is an explicit prophecy about the prophet Muhammad!.”

The Dominee, very politely parted with me by saying that it was a very interesting discussion and he would like me very much to come one day and address his congregation on the subject. A decade and half has passed since then but I am still awaiting that privilege.

I believe the Dominee was sincere when he made the offer, but prejudices die hard, and who would like to loose his sheep?

The Acid Test

To the Lambs of Christ I say, why not apply that acid test which the Master himself wanted you to apply to any would be claimant to prophethood? He had said:

“By their fruits ye shall know them. Do men gather grapes from the thorns, of figs from the thistles? Every good tree will bear good fruit and every evil tree will bear evil fruit… By their fruits ye shall know them”. (Mathew 7:16-20).

Why are you afraid to apply this test to the teachings of Muhammad? You will find in the Last Testament of God, the Holy Quran, the true fulfillment of the teachings of Moses and Jesus which will bring to the world the much needed peace and happiness. George Bernard Shaw was quoted as saying:

“If a man like Muhammad were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness.”

The weekly news magazine Time dated July 15, 1974, carried a selection of opinions by various historians, writers, military men, businessmen an others on the subject: “Who were History’s Great Leaders?” Some said that it was Hitler; others said Gandhi, Buddha, Lincoln and the like. But Jules Masserman, a United States psychoanalyst, put the standards straight by giving the correct criteria wherewith to judge. He said: “Leaders must fulfill three functions:

Provide for the well-being of the led,

Provide a social organization in which people feel relatively secure, and

Provide them with one set of beliefs.”

With the above three criteria he searches history and analyses Hitler, Pasteur, Gaesar, Moses, Confucius and the lot, and ultimately concludes: “People like Pasteur and Salk are leaders in the first sense. People like Ghandi and Confucius, on one hand, and Alexander, Caesar, and Hitler on the other, are leaders in the second, and perhaps the third sense. Jesus and Buddha belong in the third category alone. Perhaps the greatest leader of all times was Muhammad, who combined all three functions. To a lesser degree, Moses did the same.”

According to the objective standards set by the professor of the Chicago University, Jesus and Buddha are nowhere in the picture of the “Great Leaders of Mankind”, but by a queer coincidence groups Moses and Muhammad together, thus adding further weight to the argument that Jesus is not like Moses, but Muhammad is like Moses. Deut 18:18 “Like unto thee”, like Moses!

In conclusion, I end with a quotation of a Christian Reverend the commentator of the Bible, followed by that of his Master:

“The ultimate criterion of a true prophet is the moral character of his teaching.” (Prof. Dummelow).

“By their fruits ye shall know them.” (Jesus Christ)

A concluding suggestion : come let us reason together!

“Say: ‘O People of the Book! Come to common terms as between us and you: that we worship none but Allah (God); that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, lords and patrons other than Allah (God)’. If then they turn back, say: ‘Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (Bowing to God’s Will).’ ” (the Holy Quran 3:64)

People of the Book is the respectful title given to the Jews and the Christians in the Holy Quran. The Muslims are here commanded to invite, O People of the Book!, O Learned People!, O People who claim to be the recipients of Divine Revelation, of a Holy Scripture; let us gather together onto a common platform, “that we worship none but Allah (God)”, because none but God is worthy of worship, not because “The Lord thy God is a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me.” (Exodus 20:25). But because He is our Lord and Cherisher, our Sustainer and Evolver, worthy of all praise, prayer and devotion.

In the abstract the Jews and the Christians would agree to all the three propositions contained in this Quranic verse. In practice they fail. Apart from doctrinal lapses from the unity of the One True God, Allah, may He be praised, there is the question of a consecrated Priesthood (among the Jews it was hereditary also), as if a mere human being – Cohen or Pope, or Priest, or Brahuman, – could claim superiority apart from his learning and the purity of his life, or could stand between man and God in some special sense. Islam does not recognize priesthood!.

The Creed of Islam is given to us here in a nutshell from Holy Quran:

“Say ye: ‘We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes (of the Children of israel), And that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) Prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam).’ ” (the Holy Quran 2:136).

The Muslim position is clear. The Muslim does not claim to have a religion peculiar to himself. Islam is not a sect or an ethnic religion. In its view all religion is one, for the Truth is one:

“It was the same religion preached by all the earlier prophets.” (the Holy Quran 42:13).

It was the truth taught by all the inspired Books. In essence it amounts to a consciousness of the Will and Plan of God and a joyful submission to that Will and Plan. If anyone wants a religion other than that, he is false to his own nature, as he is false to God’s Will and Plan. Such a one cannot expect guidance, for he has deliberately renounced guidance.

 

 

Muhammed mentioned by name in bible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

do you believe in orginal sins wich we all inherit from adam and eve?

Indeed.

------------------

This explains it well.

 

How does all this relate to Original Sin? Right at the beginning we need to ask a basic question: What do you mean by Original Sin? The term “Original Sin” (peccatum originale) was coined by St. Augustine (353-430), and his framing of the question has tended to dominate in Western Latin Christianity. He distinguished two aspects of Original Sin, the “originating” Original Sin (peccatum originale originans) and the “originated” Original Sin (peccatum originale originatum).

 

The latter (originated) refers to the concrete human condition which is present at the birth of each one of us. We are all born into a world which in fact is already broken; it is present at our birth, and we enter into it. It is about our existence right here and now. This is a present, existential understanding.

 

The former (originating) refers to the concrete sin of historical first parents, Adam and Eve. Way back at the beginning, these first parents sinned and set the whole thing in motion. Their guilt is passed on down to all future generations. This is a past, historical understanding. But is this what Genesis is really teaching?

 

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains: “In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current” (#110).

 

Applying this principle, Scripture scholars today are taking a new look at this story. We realize more clearly now that the story of Adam and Eve is rather something like a parable. The truth is in the message of sinfulness rather than in factual history.

 

The overall narrative of Genesis 2—11 reflects a “creation-flood story” that was well known in the ancient Near East; several examples have come down to us from Mesopotamia. The biblical authors used this familiar (to them) story to teach their own distinctive view of God, the world and human beings. In other words, to read the story of Adam and Eve as a historical account is to misinterpret the text. Like a parable, it teaches a profound truth.

 

Does this lessen the importance of the story? Quite the contrary! It does indeed speak about the origin of sin. At the origin of our broken, “death-filled” existence lies the human attempt to play God. We violate the limits of creaturehood, and consequences follow.

 

In fact, not only is the Adam-Eve story about Original Sin; so are all the stories of Genesis 2—11. Each in its own way deals with an aspect of the sinful condition present at our origins. Recent theological studies of Original Sin, following more closely the teachings of Genesis, tend to view it in precisely these terms. It is about the concrete situation of human life and society rather than about some kind of taint or blot passed on biologically throughout human history. The focus is on the “originated” Original Sin.

 

Was there then an historical Adam and Eve? Cain and Abel? Noah and the flood generation? Builders of the tower of Babel? Not in a literal sense. These are stories composed with figurative language; they do not give us that kind of historical information.

 

But we can ask our question differently: Are there an Adam and Eve? Cain and Abel? Noah and the flood generation? Builders of the Tower of Babel? Here the answer is a definite Yes.

 

If you ask, Where, then, are Adam and Eve?, the answer is: We find them when we look in the mirror. We are Adam, and we are Eve; we are Cain and Abel; we are the flood generation who spread injustice over the earth; we ignore God and build towers to make great names for ourselves. The man and woman of Genesis 2—3, as well as the other characters of the primal stories, are intended to represent an Everyman and Everywoman. They are paradigms, figurative equivalents, of human conduct in the face of temptation, not lessons in biology or history. The Bible is teaching religion, not science or literalistic history!

 

More here http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0507.asp

Edited by Heavens Fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an essay refuting each of Mr. Deedat's claims. [anti-Islamic link removed by admin]

As I said earlier the use of brethren in Deuteronomy points to the prophet coming from israel. .

Edited by dot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed.

------------------

 

 

 

but your belief system goes against jesus teachings, are you aware of that?

 

So you believe that we inherit orginal sin from Adam and eve, so we are born with that sin, so if we would die, then we would go to Hell beacuse of that sin, but

 

jesus said this

 

 Matthew 19:14 

Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

 

if little children goes to Paradise(kingdom of heaven) then it means they have no sins inherited from anyone, that is why jesus said that for such belongs the paradise.

 

and not only that, even bible denies that sins are inherited

 

Deuteronomy 24:16

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

 

so if this verse from bible is not enough for you that everyone is responsible for his own sins, same it is with adam and us, if he sinned, he is responsible for it, not we, nobody asked us if he shall do it or not that we should share same sin.

 

that is why you are wrong, i give you clear proof from your holy scripture why your beleif system is wrong, and not even logical. where is logic, i kill a person and they put you in jail for that, where is logic here???

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As I said earlier the use of brethren in Deuteronomy points to the prophet coming from israel. .

 

where does bible say that he shall come from israel? show us evidence

 

it clearly say from your brethren, and jew and arabs are bretheren, since Isaac(israelites) and Ishmael(arabs) are brothers.

 

so it can only be fromisraelites or arabs, and in this case arabs.

 

 John 1:25 

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

 

so we see that jews expected Christ(Jesus), Elias(John the baptist), and That prophet (Muhammed)

 

it would be really strange that they repeated themselves that christ and prophet is the same,

 

it is like

Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that human, nor animal, neither that man?

 

human and man are same, but not animal, so christ and prophet are two different persons in this text. do you understand what i want to say to you?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but your belief system goes against jesus teachings, are you aware of that?

 

So you believe that we inherit orginal sin from Adam and eve, so we are born with that sin, so if we would die, then we would go to Hell beacuse of that sin, but

 

jesus said this

 

Matthew 19:14

Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

 

if little children goes to Paradise(kingdom of heaven) then it means they have no sins inherited from anyone, that is why jesus said that for such belongs the paradise.

 

and not only that, even bible denies that sins are inherited

 

Deuteronomy 24:16

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

 

so if this verse from bible is not enough for you that everyone is responsible for his own sins, same it is with adam and us, if he sinned, he is responsible for it, not we, nobody asked us if he shall do it or not that we should share same sin.

 

that is why you are wrong, i give you clear proof from your holy scripture why your beleif system is wrong, and not even logical. where is logic, i kill a person and they put you in jail for that, where is logic here???

 

 

It is in the bible and in early church fathers.

 

Here is from a website which shows its doctrines using both.

 

 

Statements of the Fathers are not meant as a direct proof of doctrine since the patristic writings are not inspired Scripture nor in Catholic theology are the Fathers considered infallible as individuals. However, they ARE witnesses to the authentic Christian faith as it was handed down and developed in the early Church.

On the doctrine of Original Sin -- if the Catholic belief is true -- we should find in the Fathers that Adam's [and Eve's] Sin resulted in the following consequences --

death for all (Gen 3; 1 Cor 15:21f; Rom 5:12,15; 6:23)

condemnation for all (Rom 5:16ff)

an inherited "contagion" -- from birth we are "constituted sinners" (Rom 5:12,19; cf. 7:13ff; Psalm 51:5; Eph 2:1-3)

loss or lack of grace, holiness, divine sonship

and transmitted "by propagation not by imitation [of Adam]"

Concerning Baptism, we should find the Sacrament results in --

remission of sin and reception of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:3

spiritual regeneration/the new birth (John 3:3,5; Titus 3:5)

restoration of sonship, grace, holiness (Rom 6:3ff; 8:11ff)

and that the Sacrament was given to infants early on

ST. IRENAEUS (c. 180 AD)

....having become disobedient, [Eve] was made the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race; so also Mary, betrothed to a man but nevertheless still a virgin, being obedient, was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race....Thus, the knot of Eve's disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. What the virgin Eve had bound in unbelief, the Virgin Mary loosed through faith. ...But this man [of whom I have been speaking] is Adam, if truth be told, the first-formed man....WE, however, are all FROM him; and as WE are FROM him, WE have INHERITED his title [of sin]. ...Indeed, THROUGH the first Adam, WE offended God by not observing His command. Through the second Adam, however, we are reconciled, and are made obedient even unto death. For we were debtors to none other except to Him, whose commandment WE transgressed at the beginning. (Against Heresies 3:22:4; 3:23:2; 5:16:3)

TERTULLIAN (c. 200 AD)

Finally, in every instance of vexation, contempt, and abhorrence, you pronounce the name of Satan. He it is whom we call the angel of wickedness, the author of every error, the corrupter of the whole world, through whom MAN was deceived in the very beginning so that he transgressed the command of God. On ACCOUNT of his transgression MAN was given over to death; and the WHOLE HUMAN RACE, which was INFECTED by his SEED, was made the TRANSMITTER of condemnation. (The Testmiony of the Soul 3:2, c. 200 AD)

"Because by a man came death, by a man also comes resurrection" [1 Cor 15:21]. Here, by the word MAN, who consists of a body, as we have often shown already, I understand that it is a fact that Christ had a body. And if we are all made to live in Christ as WE were made to DIE IN ADAM, then, as in the flesh we were made to DIE IN ADAM, so also in the flesh are we made to live in Christ. Otherwise, if the coming to life in Christ were not to take place in that same substance in which WE DIE IN ADAM, the parallel were imperfect. (Against Marcion 5:9:5, c. 210 AD)

ORIGEN (c. 244 AD)

EVERYONE in the world FALLS PROSTRATE under SIN. And it is the Lord who sets up those who are cast down and who sustains all who are falling [Psalm 145:14]. IN ADAM ALL DIE, and THUS the world FALLS PROSTRATE and requires to be SET UP AGAIN, so that in Christ all may be made to live [1 Cor 15:22]. (Homilies on Jeremias 8:1)

EVERY SOUL that is BORN into flesh is SOILED by the filth of wickedness and SIN....And if it should seem necessary to do so, there may be added to the aforementioned considerations [referring to previous Scriptures cited that we all sin] the fact that in the Church, Baptism is given FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS; and according to the usage of the Church, Baptism is given EVEN TO INFANTS. And indeed if there were nothing in infants which REQUIRED a remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of Baptism would seem SUPERFLUOUS. (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3)

The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism EVEN TO INFANTS. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the INNATE STAINS OF SIN, which must be WASHED AWAY through water and the Spirit [cf. John 3:5; Acts 2:38]. (Commentaries on Romans 5:9)

ST. CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE (c. 250 AD)

If, in the case of the worst sinners and of those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the REMISSION OF THEIR SINS is granted and no one is held back from Baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an INFANT not be held back, who, having but recently been BORN, has done no sin [committed no personal sin], EXCEPT THAT, BORN OF THE FLESH ACCORDING TO ADAM, HE HAS CONTRACTED THE CONTAGION OF THAT OLD DEATH FROM HIS FIRST BEING BORN. For this very reason does he approach more easily to receive the REMISSION OF SINS: because the SINS FORGIVEN HIM are NOT his OWN but THOSE OF ANOTHER [i.e. inherited from Adam]. (Letters 64:5 of Cyprian and his 66 colleagues in Council to Fidus)

ST. METHODIUS OF PHILIPPI (c. 300 AD)

Man too was CREATED WITHOUT CORRUPTION....But when it came about that he transgressed the commandment, he suffered a terrible and destructive fall and was reduced to a state of death. The Lord says that it was on this account that He Himself came down from heaven to the world, taking leave of the ranks and armies of the angels....It was to this end that the Word put on humanity: that He might overcome the serpent and that He might Himself put down the CONDEMNATION which had FIRST COME INTO BEING WHEN MAN WAS RUINED. For it was fitting that the evil one should be conquered not by another, but by that one whom he had deceived, and whom he was boasting that he held in subjection. In no other way could sin and condemnation be destroyed, except by that same man's being CREATED ANEW -- he of whom it was said: "Earth you are, and unto earth you shall return" [Gen 3:19] -- and by his undoing the sentence which, BECAUSE OF HIM [Adam], had been pronounced upon ALL. Thus, just as IN ADAM ALL DID FORMERLY DIE, so again in Christ, who put on Adam, ALL ARE MADE TO LIVE [1 Cor 15:22]. (The Banquet of the Ten Virgins or On Chastity 3:6)

APHRAATES THE PERSIAN SAGE (c. 340 AD)

For from Baptism we receive the Spirit of Christ. At that same moment in which the priests invoke the Spirit, heaven opens, and he descends and rests upon the waters; and those who are baptized are clothed in Him. For the Spirit is ABSENT from all those who are BORN OF THE FLESH, until they come to the WATER OF RE-BIRTH; and then they receive the Holy Spirit [cf. John 3:5; Acts 2:38]. Indeed, in the first birth they are born possessed of an animal spirit, which is created within man, nor afterwards does it ever die, for it is written: "Adam became a living soul" [cf. Gen 2:7; 1 Cor 15:45]. But in the second birth, that through Baptism, they receive the Holy Spirit from a particle of the Godhead; nor is He afterwards subject to death....Of all those who have been BORN and who have PUT ON FLESH, there is ONE ONLY who is INNOCENT: namely, our Lord Jesus Christ, who in fact testifies to such in His own regard [John 16:33; Isa 53:9; Mal 3:6; 2 Cor 5:21; Col 2:14; 1 Cor 9:24 are then alluded to or cited]....Moreover, among the SONS OF ADAM THERE IS NONE besides Him who might ENTER THE RACE [are born] WITHOUT BEING WOUNDED or swallowed up....For SIN has ruled from the time ADAM TRANSGRESSED THE COMMAND. By one among the many was it swallowed up; MANY [i.e. ALL as in Rom 5:18-19] DID IT WOUND, AND MANY DID IT KILL; but none among the many killed it until our Savior came, who took it on Himself and fixed it to His cross....Indeed, because the first human being gave ear and listened to the serpent, he received the sentence of malediction, by which he became food for the serpent; and the curse PASSED ON TO ALL HIS PROGENY. (Treatises 6:14; 7:1; 23:3)

ST. EPHRAIM OF SYRIA (c. 306 - 373 AD)

Adam sinned and EARNED ALL SORROWS, AND THE WORLD, FOLLOWING HIS LEAD, ALL GUILT. And it took no thought of how it might be restored, but only of how its fall might be made more pleasant for it. Glory to Him that came and restored it! (Hymns of the Epiphany 10:1)

ST. ATHANASIUS (c. 360 AD)

Adam, the first man, altered his course, and through sin death came into the world....When Adam transgressed, SIN reached out TO ALL MEN. (Discourses Against the Arians 1:51)

ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM (c. 350 AD)

The crown of the cross led into the light those who were blinded by ignorance, loosed all those who were chained by their sins, and redeemed the totality of men. Do not wonder that the whole world is redeemed. It was no mere man, but the only-begotten Son of God, who died on its behalf. Indeed, ONE MAN'S SIN, THAT OF ADAM, HAD THE POWER TO BRING DEATH TO THE WORLD. If by the transgression of one, death reigned over the world [Rom 5:17], why should not life more fittingly reign by the righteousness of one? If they were cast out of paradise because of the tree and the eating thereof, shall not believers now enter more easily into paradise because of the tree of Jesus? If that man first formed out of the earth USHERED IN UNIVERSAL DEATH, shall not He that formed him out of the earth bring in eternal life, since He Himself is Life? (Catechetical Lectures 13:1-2)

ST. BASIL THE GREAT (c. 379 AD)

Little given, much gotten; by the donation of food the ORIGINAL SIN IS DISCHARGED [Greek given by Jurgens]. JUST AS ADAM TRANSMITTED THE SIN by his wicked eating, we destroy that treacherous food when we cure the need and hunger of our brother.....For prisoners, Baptism is ransom, FORGIVENESS OF DEBTS, DEATH OF SIN, regeneration of the soul, a resplendent garment, an unbreakable seal, a chariot to heaven, a protector royal, a gift of adoption. (Eulogies on the Martyrs 8:7; 13:5)

DIDYMUS THE BLIND (c. 313 - 398 AD)

If Christ had received His body from a marital union and not in another way it would be supposed that he too is liable to an accounting for that SIN, WHICH, INDEED, ALL WHO ARE DESCENDED FROM ADAM CONTRACT IN SUCCESSION. [see Jurgens comment on this passage, vol 2, pg 64] (Against the Manicheans

ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM (c. 344 - 407 AD)

You see how many are the benefits of Baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins; but we have enumerated ten honors. For this reason we baptize even infants, THOUGH THEY ARE NOT DEFILED BY SIN [or though they do not HAVE PERSONAL SINS]: so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his members. (Baptismal Catechesis cited by St. Augustine in Contra Julian 1:6)

On this passage, St. Augustine remarks in Contra Julian 1:6:22 after quoting the above line in Greek:

"You see that he (John Chrysostom) certainly did not say, 'Infants are not defiled by sin,' or 'sins,' but, 'NOT HAVING SINS.' Understand 'of their own,' and there is no difficulty. 'But,' you will say, 'why did he not add "of their own" himself?' Why else, I suppose, if not that he was speaking in a Catholic church and never supposed he would be understood in any other way, when no one had raised such a question, and he could speak more unconcernedly when you were not there to dispute the point?"

Further, Jurgens comments that Julian of Eclanum had appealed to Chrysostom in support of Pelagianism by quoting the line above from -Ad neophytos- "We baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by sin" and he took this as a denial of original sin. However, Augustine had not just the Latin but the original GREEK of the same text which reads: "We baptize even infants, though they do not HAVE SINS." Augustine insists that the plural SINS makes it clear that Chrysostom was speaking of personal sins. Augustine further exonerates Chrysostom and deprives Julian of his source by quoting numerous other passages of Chrysostom.

Christ came once. He found OUR paternal note of hand, which Adam wrote. That man [Adam] brought in the beginning of the debt. We INCREASED the interest by OUR LATER sins. (cited by St. Augustine in Contra Julian 1:6:26, the original Greek of Chrysostom is given by Jurgens, vol 2, pg 101, n2)

Augustine comments: "Was he content to say 'the paternal note of hand,' without adding 'our?' He added the 'our' so that we might know that BEFORE we INCREASED the interest by our LATER sins, the debt of that paternal note of hand ALREADY pertained to us."

What does this mean, "Because all have sinned" [Rom 5:12] ? In that fall even those who did not eat of the tree -- ALL DID FROM THE TRANSGRESSION [of Adam] become mortal....For [Adam's sin in paradise] was productive of that death in which WE ALL participate....From this it is clear that it was not this sin, the sin of transgressing the Law, that ruined everything, BUT THAT SIN OF ADAM'S DISOBEDIENCE....What is the proof of this? The fact that even before the Law, ALL DIED. "Death reigned," he says, "from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned" [Rom 5:14a]. How did it reign? "In the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come" [Rom 5:14b]. This too is why Adam is a type of Christ: ....That when a Jew would say to you, "How by the righteous action of this one Man, Christ, was the world saved?" you might be able to answer him, "How by the wrong-doing of one Adam, WAS THE WORLD CONDEMNED?" (Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans 10:1)

Jurgens comments, vol 2, pg 115-116, n5 on the above and Rom 5:12 --

"Chrysostom knew Greek too, and he never supposed it meant anything except BECAUSE. He still refers the passage to original sin, and understands by the clause "because all have sinned" that what is meant is "because all have sinned [iN ADAM]." It is not just that all have sinned in sequence after Adam, but all have sinned in consequence of Adam.....The final clause clearly calls for the interpretation "because all have sinned IN ADAM." It need not exclude personal sin, but it must include original sin..... Chrysostom and the Fathers at large would have seen Rom 5:12 as referring to original sin. The mention of sin causing death, and death being therefore the lot of all men were enough; for it must be admitted that the Fathers in general do not easily distinguish between original sin and its effects. Thus, for Chrysostom, the very fact that men do die, even without the "because all have sinned," would point to original sin." (Note the following)

We have been freed from punishment, we have put off all wickedness, and we have been reborn from above [in Baptism, John 3:3,5], and we have risen again, with the old man buried, and we have been redeemed, and we have been sanctified, and we have been given adoption into sonship, and we have been justified, and we have been made brothers of the Only-begotten, and we have been constituted joint heirs and concorporeal with Him and have been perfected in his flesh, and have been united to Him as a body to its head....All of this Paul calls an "abundance of grace" [Rom 5:17], showing that what we have received is not just a medicine to counteract the WOUND, but even health and comeliness and honor and glory and dignities going far beyond what were natural to us. And each of these was able by itself to do away with death; but when all of them seem to run together at the same time, there is not a vestige of it left, nor a shadow of it to be seen, so completely has it disappeared....Christ paid out much more than the debt we owed, as much more as the boundless sea exceeds a little drop...."For just as by the disobedience of one man the many were MADE SINNERS, so too by the obedience of One, the many will be made just" [Rom 5:19]. ....What does the word "SINNERS" mean here? It seems to me that it means LIABLE TO PUNISHMENT AND CONDEMNED TO DEATH. (Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans 10:2)

ST. PACIAN OF BARCELONA (c. 392 AD)

After Adam sinned, as I noted before, when the Lord said, "You are earth, and to earth you shall return" [Gen 3:19], Adam was condemned to death. THIS CONDEMNATION PASSED ON TO THE WHOLE RACE. FOR ALL SINNED, ALREADY BY THEIR SHARING IN THAT NATURE [ipsa iam urgente natura], as the Apostle says: "For through one man sin made its entry, and through sin death, and thus it came down to all men, because all have sinned" [Rom 5:12, and see Jurgens note, vol 2, pg 144, n3]....Someone will say to me: But THE SIN OF ADAM DESERVEDLY PASSED ON TO HIS POSTERITY, because they were begotten of him: but how are we to be begotten of Christ, so that we can be saved through Him? Do not think of these things in a carnal fashion. You have already seen how we are begotten by Christ our Parent. In these last times Christ took a soul and with it flesh from Mary: this flesh came to prepare salvation.... (Sermons on Baptism 2; 6)

ST. AMBROSE OF MILAN (c. 383 AD)

Before we are born WE ARE INFECTED WITH THE CONTAGION, and before we see the light of day we experience the INJURY OF OUR ORIGIN. IN INIQUITY WE ARE CONCEIVED [cf. Psalm 51:5] -- he does not say whether the wickedness is of our parents or our own -- AND IN SINS each one's mother gives him life. Nor with this did he state whether his mother gave birth to him in her own sins or whether the sins of which he speaks pertain in some way to being born. But consider and see what is meant. NO CONCEPTION IS WITHOUT INIQUITY, since there are NO PARENTS WHO HAVE NOT FALLEN. And if there is NO INFANT WHO IS EVEN ONE DAY WITHOUT SIN, much less can the CONCEPTIONS of a mother's womb be WITHOUT SIN. We are conceived, therefore, in the sin of our parents, and it is in their sins that we are born. (Explanation of David the Prophet 1:11:56, Jurgens comments that in the above passage "the emphasis is upon concupiscence")

Adam was brought into being; and WE WERE ALL BROUGHT INTO BEING IN HIM. Adam perished and IN HIM ALL PERISHED. (Commentary on the Gospel of Luke 7:234, c. 389 AD)

AMBROSIASTER or Pseudo-Ambrose (c. 366 - 384 AD)

"In whom" -- that is, IN ADAM -- "all have sinned" [Rom 5:12]. And he said "in whom," using the masculine form, when he was speaking of a woman, because the reference was not to a specific individual but to the race. It is clear, therefore, that ALL HAVE SINNED IN ADAM, -en masse- as it were; for when he himself was corrupted by sin, all whom he begot were BORN UNDER SIN. On his account, then, all are sinners, because WE ARE ALL FROM HIM. He lost God's favor when he strayed. (Commentaries on 13 Pauline Epistles, In Rom 5:12, see also Jurgens comments vol 2, pg 179, n1-3)

ST. AUGUSTINE (c. 354 - 430 AD)

For by this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into His body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive, besides offering Himself as an example of righteousness for those who would imitate Him, gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. In a similar way Adam, IN WHOM ALL DIE [1 Cor 15:22], besides being an example for imitation to those who willfully transgress the commandment of the Lord, by the hidden depravity of his own carnal concupiscence, depraved in his own person all those who come from his stock...."Through one man," the Apostle says, "sin entered the world, through sin death" [Rom 5:12]. AND THIS REFERS NOT TO IMITATION BUT TO PROPAGATION....Unless we voluntarily depart from the rule of the Christian faith it must be admitted that inasmuch as infants are, by the Sacrament of Baptism, conformed to the death of Christ, they are also freed from the serpent's venomous bite. This bite, however, they did not receive in their own proper life but in him who first suffered that wound....IN ADAM ALL SINNED when, by that power innate in his nature, by which he was able to beget them, all were as yet the one Adam. (Forgiveness...and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 2:27:43; 3:7:14)

Concupiscence, which is atoned for [expiatur] only by the Sacrament of regeneration [baptism], does most certainly, by generation, pass on the bond of sin to the progeny, if they are not loosed from it by the same regeneration. For concupiscence itself is certainly no longer a sin in the regenerate, when they do not consent to illicit deeds and when their members are not applied by the ruling mind to the performance of such deeds....But because the guilt of concupiscence is prevalent in man who was born, that is called sin, in a certain manner of speaking, which was made by sin and which, if it conquers, produces sin. This guilt, however, through the remission of all sins, is not allowed to prevail in the man who is reborn, if he does not obey it when in some way it commands him to perform evil works....This concupiscence of the flesh is the daughter of sin, as it were, and, as often as it consents to shameful deeds, it is the mother of more sins. Whatever offspring is born of this concupiscence of the flesh is BOUND BY ORIGINAL SIN [originali est obligata peccato], unless it be REBORN in Him whom the Virgin conceived without that concupiscence; for which reason, when He designed to be born in the flesh, He ALONE WAS BORN WITHOUT SIN....Marriage is not the cause of the sin which comes with being born and is expiated in being reborn [at Baptism]; rather, THE WILLFUL SIN OF THE FIRST MAN IS THE CAUSE OF ORIGINAL SIN [voluntarium peccatum hominis primi originalis est causa peccati]....Why, then, does [Julian] ask us: "Whence is it that sin is found in an infant: through will, or through marriage, or through his parents?"....For all this the Apostle has an answer. He accuses neither the will of the infant, which is not yet matured in him for sinning; nor marriage as such, which has not only its institution from God, but a blessing as well; nor parents as such, who are licitly and legitimately joined together for the procreation of children. Rather, he says:

"THROUGH ONE MAN SIN CAME INTO THIS WORLD, AND THROUGH SIN DEATH, AND THUS IT PASSED THROUGH INTO ALL MEN, FOR IN HIM ALL HAVE SINNED." [Rom 5:12, see Jurgens comment, vol 3, pg 138, n22]

"If sin," [Julian] says, "is from the will, the will is evil because it does sin; but if it is from nature, nature is evil." I quickly respond: "Sin is from the will." He asks, perhaps, "And ORIGINAL SIN too?" And I answer: "Absolutely original sin too. Because this too was sown by the WILL OF THE FIRST MAN, so that it existed in him and PASSED ON TO ALL." (Marriage and Concupiscence 1:23:25; 24:27; 2:26:43; 27:44-45; 28:4

You are convicted on every side. The numerous testimonies in regard to original sin, testimonies of the saints, are clearer than daylight. Look what an assembly it is into which I have brought you. Here is Ambrose of Milan....here too is John of Constantinople [Chrysostom]... Here is Basil...Here are others too, whose general agreement is so great that it ought to move you. This is not, as you write with an evil pen, "a conspiracy of the lost." They were famous in the Catholic Church for their pursuit of sound doctrine. Armed and girded with spiritual weapons, they waged strenuous wars against the heretics; and when they had faithfully completed the labors appointed them, they fell asleep in the lap of peace....See where I have brought you: the assembly of those saints is no common rabble. They are not only sons but also fathers of the Church....Holy and blessed priests, widely reknowned for their diligence in divine eloquence, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Reticius, Olympius, Hilary, Ambrose, Gregory, Innocent, John, Basil -- and whether you like it or not, I will add the presbyter Jerome, while omitting those who are still alive -- have pronounced against you their opinion about original sin in the guilty succession of all men, whence no one is exempted except Him that the Virgin conceived without the law of sin warring against the law of the mind....What they found in the Church, they kept; what they learned, they taught; what they received from the fathers, they handed on to the sons. We were never involved with you before these judges; but our case has been tried before them. Neither we nor you were known to them; we but recite their judgments delivered in our favor against you.....These men are bishops, learned, grave, holy, and most zealous defenders of the truth against garrulous vanities, in whose reason, erudition, and freedom, three qualities you demand in a judge, you can find nothing to despise....With such planters, waterers, builders, shepherds, and fosterers the holy Church grew after the time of the Apostles. (Against Julian 1:7:30-31; 2:10:33-34; 2:10:37)

 More here:

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/christian-discussion/62101-doctrine-original-sin-church-fathers.html

 

Here is on from the bible alone.

 

There are several lines of biblical evidence for the historic Christian doctrine that we are all born into the world with sinful natures, due to the sin of Adam.

 

Scripture says that we are born sinners and that we are by nature sinners

Psalm 51:5 states that we all come into the world as sinners: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me." Ephesians 2:2 says that all people who are not in Christ are "sons of disobedience." Ephesians 2:3 also establishes this, saying that we are all "by nature children of wrath." If we are all "by nature children of wrath," it can only be because we are all by nature sinners--for God does not direct His wrath towards those who are not guilty. God did not create the human race sinful, but upright. But we fell into sin and became sinful due to the sin of Adam.

 

Scripture speaks of humans as unrighteous from infancy

There are also verses which declare that we are all unrighteous from the time that we are born. Proverbs 22:15 says "Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child." Genesis 8:21 declares, "...the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth." Jonathon Edwards, in his classic work The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin Defended, remarks that on this verse: "The word translated youth, signifies the whole of the former part of the age of man, which commences from the beginning of life. The word in its derivation, has reference to the birth or beginning of existence...so that the word here translated youth, comprehends not only what we in English most commonly call the time of youth, but also childhood and infancy."

 

Humanity is Often Described in General Terms as Unrighteous

Unrighteousness is often spoken of in Scripture as something belonging to the human race as a whole.This implies that it is the property of our species. In other words, sinfulness is considered a property of human nature after the fall. Thus, it must be concluded that we are all born sinners, since we are all born human and sin is regarded as a property of humanity. In this vein, consider Ephesians 2:1-3:

 

And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

 

Paul is here reminding Christians of what they were like before their conversion to Christ ("you were dead in your trespasses...in which you formerly walked"). Thus, all people, until and unless they are converted, are sinners. Paul goes on to make it absolutely clear that all Christians came from this state ("...we to all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh") and that all non-Christians are still in this state ("...and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.") Thus, Scripture regards all people before they are saved by Christ as sinners and thus deserving of punishment from God. Which is to say that from the inception of our existence, we are sinful.

 

In Psalm 14:2, 3 we read: "The Lord has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one." Here again we see unrighteousness as a property of the human race: "they have all turned aside...there is no one who does good."

 

Job 15:14 similarly declares that sinfulness is a property of humanity: "What is man, that he should be pure, or he who is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?" Verses 15-16 then speaks of the human race as a whole in shocking terms expressing our general corruption: "Behold, He puts no trust in His holy ones, And the heavens are not pure in His sight; How much less one who is detestable and corrupt, Man, who drinks iniquity like water!"

 

Jeremiah 17:9 says that "the heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it." This seems to assume original sin--wickedness is a property of the human heart. Ecclesiastes 9:3 declares a similar truth: "...the hearts of the sons of men are full of evil, and insanity is in their hearts through their lives." Again, the human heart is sinful, and therefore all humans are sinful.

 

These texts indicate, then, that human nature is corrupt. Therefore, even infants are corrupt because they are human. And if infants are corrupt, then this is the same as saying that we are born corrupt--which means we are born with original sin. One may, however, object that these texts speak nothing of infants, only those who are old enough to make moral decisions. All of those people are sinful, but this doesn't mean that infants are.

 

This is an ingenious objection, but it does not succeed. First, the texts do not seem to restrict themselves to people who are old enough to make intelligent decisions. They seem to speak of human nature as a whole, a classification under which infants certainly fall. Second, as Jonathan Edwards pointed out, "..this would not alter the case...For if all mankind, as soon as ever they are capable of reflecting, and knowing their own moral state, find themselves wicked, this proves that they are wicked by nature."

 

In other words, even if these verses were only speaking of people old enough to mentally understand sin, they would still be teaching original sin. For on that view, these verses would be saying that all people, as soon as they know good from evil, find themselves sinners. But if all people, as soon as they are capable of moral decisions, find themselves sinners, this proves that they are that way by nature.

 

Third, Edwards also says, "why should man be so continually spoken of as evil, carnal, perverse, deceitful, and desperately wicked, if all men are by nature as perfectly innocent, and free form any propensity to evil, as Adam was the first moment of his creation?" (Edwards, The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin, 188).

 

Infants die, therefore they are not innocent

Death--both physical and spiritual--is a result of sin (Romans 5:12; 6:23). Thus, death only comes upon those who have sinned. Since infants die, they therefore must be sinners. It could be objected that Christ was sinless, and yet He died. But He willingly gave up His life, and He did it to conquer the curse of death that we were under. In fact, God imputed to Christ our sins on the cross, and Christ died in punishment of those sins.

 

If humanity is not born in sin, wouldn't we expect there to be some people who have "beaten the odds" and never sinned?

If we are born innocent and good, why aren't there at least some people who have continued in this state and remained sinless? The fact that everybody sins needs some explanation. The best explanation is that we are sinners by nature. Someone might argue that the reason all people sin is because society is sinful, and thus society renders it impossible for anybody to keep themselves entirely pure. But that only pushes the question back one step. How did society get sinful in the first place? If people are born morally good, then how did it come about that they congregated into socities that influence all people to sin?

 

While article here:

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/what-is-the-biblical-evidence-for-original-sin

 

Also babies who die don't go to hell. Babies are protected by invincible ignorance as they can't choose redemption and don't know what they do when they sin. Quite simply they are safe until they reach a certain age, not sure what exactly.

 

Finally andalusi your own beliefs contradict the bible far more.

 

I won't post the link a skater on the article gets ugly later on.

. I. The Doctrine of God

Islam correctly opposes idolatry and teaches that there is only one God. But more is needed (James 2:19). So consider further:

A. Islam Says Jesus Is Not Divine.

Muhammad taught there is only one Divine Being in God. He denied the Deity of Jesus, saying He was just a man - a great prophet, but not the Divine Son of God. (Qur’an 4:162-171; 6:100,101; 19:88-92)

The Bible says Jesus is Divine.

John 1:1,14 - Jesus (the Word) was God, was with God in the beginning, and became flesh to dwell among men as a man.

Colossians 2:9 - In Jesus dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

John 20:28,29 - Thomas called Jesus "my Lord and my God." Jesus pronounced a blessing on all others who believe the same (cf. vv 30,31).

How can Muslims deny these teachings and yet claim to believe the Bible is true and Jesus was a prophet?

[Phil. 2:6-8; Heb. 1:8,9; Tit. 2:13; Isa. 9:6; John 8:58; 5:23]

The Bible says Jesus is the Only-Begotten Son of God.

Matthew 16:13-17 - During His lifetime many people believed what Muslims today believe: that Jesus was a great prophet like other prophets. But Peter confessed that Jesus was not just a man but was the Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus Himself affirmed that Peter's statement had been revealed by God.

John 10:35 - Jesus plainly admitted that He had said, "I am the Son of God."

Matthew 17:5; 3:17 - Twice God spoke from heaven and claimed Jesus as His beloved Son. Bible writers claimed to be eyewitnesses that these things were true (2 Peter 1:16-18).

Romans 1:4 - The resurrection declared Jesus to be the Son of God.

To believe that Jesus was just a great man and a prophet is to belittle Him and to deny His own statements. To believe some other man was as great as Jesus is to blaspheme Him. If Jesus spoke the truth, then He was more than a prophet.

Muslims must either admit that Jesus was the Divine Son of God, or else they must admit they do not believe that Jesus and the Bible are true.

[John 3:16; 1:14; 3:18; 1 John 4:9; Colossians 1:15,18; Eph. 1:19-22; 1 Corinthians 15:23-28]

The Bible says Jesus has Divine characteristics.

He was eternal - Micah 5:2 [isa. 9:6]

He was all-knowing - John 16:30; 21:17

He was all-powerful over created things - Matt. 28:18; Rev. 19:16; 17:14; Acts 10:36; Rom. 10:12; John 3:31; Rom. 9:5.

How could these characteristics be possessed by a mere man? Are these things true of Muhammad? If not, then how could he be as great as Jesus?

The Bible says Jesus is the Creator of the universe and the Judge of mankind.

John 1:3 - All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. [Heb. 1:2; Col. 1:16,17]

John 5:22,23 - The Father has committed all judgment to the Son.

2 Corinthians 5:10 - Jesus will be our judge; we must all appear before Him. Jesus will be Muhammad's judge! How can Muhammad be as great? [Acts 17:31; Matt. 25:31ff]

What mere human prophet could create the universe or judge all mankind? Muhammad makes no such claims. These are the claims of a Divine Being. How can Muslims deny these teachings and yet claim to believe the Bible is true and Jesus was a prophet?

The Bible says Jesus accepted worship.

Jesus taught that no one but God should be worshipped (Matt. 4:10). Both men and angels in the New Testament refused to allow people to bow in worship to them (Acts 10:25,26; Rev. 22:8,9).

Matthew 28:9,17; Hebrews 1:6 - However, Jesus' disciples worshipped Him, and angels are commanded by God to worship Him. [Cf. Rev. 5:12-14; Luke 24:52]

Jesus accepted worship such as was forbidden to man. How can Islam believe the Bible and believe Jesus was from God, while denying that He deserved worship? When they claim that Jesus was just a human prophet and that Muhammad was as great a prophet as Jesus, the Scripture says they are unbelievers (John 20:30,31; 8:24; Mark 16:16).

Islam is like a man who views a building from a great distance. He can tell there is only one building, but a closer view would reveal that it has three stories. So Islam correctly affirms there is only one God, but the greater revelation of New Testament shows that this one God consists of three separate and distinct individual spirit Beings.

 

I know you believe the bible to be corrupt so let's move to that. What evidence do you have for this corruption? Besides a few minor differences in grammar, the new testament remains the same as that from the 1st and 2nd century. And all of those differences can be fixed with minor effort. I remember reading a study that went per this but I can't find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but your belief system goes against jesus teachings, are you aware of that?

 

So you believe that we inherit orginal sin from Adam and eve, so we are born with that sin, so if we would die, then we would go to Hell beacuse of that sin, but

 

jesus said this

 

Matthew 19:14

Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

 

if little children goes to Paradise(kingdom of heaven) then it means they have no sins inherited from anyone, that is why jesus said that for such belongs the paradise.

 

and not only that, even bible denies that sins are inherited

 

Deuteronomy 24:16

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

 

so if this verse from bible is not enough for you that everyone is responsible for his own sins, same it is with adam and us, if he sinned, he is responsible for it, not we, nobody asked us if he shall do it or not that we should share same sin.

 

that is why you are wrong, i give you clear proof from your holy scripture why your beleif system is wrong, and not even logical. where is logic, i kill a person and they put you in jail for that, where is logic here???

 

 

It is in the bible and in early church fathers.

 

Here is from a website which shows its doctrines using both.

 

 

Statements of the Fathers are not meant as a direct proof of doctrine since the patristic writings are not inspired Scripture nor in Catholic theology are the Fathers considered infallible as individuals. However, they ARE witnesses to the authentic Christian faith as it was handed down and developed in the early Church.

On the doctrine of Original Sin -- if the Catholic belief is true -- we should find in the Fathers that Adam's [and Eve's] Sin resulted in the following consequences --

death for all (Gen 3; 1 Cor 15:21f; Rom 5:12,15; 6:23)

condemnation for all (Rom 5:16ff)

an inherited "contagion" -- from birth we are "constituted sinners" (Rom 5:12,19; cf. 7:13ff; Psalm 51:5; Eph 2:1-3)

loss or lack of grace, holiness, divine sonship

and transmitted "by propagation not by imitation [of Adam]"

Concerning Baptism, we should find the Sacrament results in --

remission of sin and reception of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:3

spiritual regeneration/the new birth (John 3:3,5; Titus 3:5)

restoration of sonship, grace, holiness (Rom 6:3ff; 8:11ff)

and that the Sacrament was given to infants early on

ST. IRENAEUS (c. 180 AD)

....having become disobedient, [Eve] was made the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race; so also Mary, betrothed to a man but nevertheless still a virgin, being obedient, was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race....Thus, the knot of Eve's disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. What the virgin Eve had bound in unbelief, the Virgin Mary loosed through faith. ...But this man [of whom I have been speaking] is Adam, if truth be told, the first-formed man....WE, however, are all FROM him; and as WE are FROM him, WE have INHERITED his title [of sin]. ...Indeed, THROUGH the first Adam, WE offended God by not observing His command. Through the second Adam, however, we are reconciled, and are made obedient even unto death. For we were debtors to none other except to Him, whose commandment WE transgressed at the beginning. (Against Heresies 3:22:4; 3:23:2; 5:16:3)

TERTULLIAN (c. 200 AD)

Finally, in every instance of vexation, contempt, and abhorrence, you pronounce the name of Satan. He it is whom we call the angel of wickedness, the author of every error, the corrupter of the whole world, through whom MAN was deceived in the very beginning so that he transgressed the command of God. On ACCOUNT of his transgression MAN was given over to death; and the WHOLE HUMAN RACE, which was INFECTED by his SEED, was made the TRANSMITTER of condemnation. (The Testmiony of the Soul 3:2, c. 200 AD)

"Because by a man came death, by a man also comes resurrection" [1 Cor 15:21]. Here, by the word MAN, who consists of a body, as we have often shown already, I understand that it is a fact that Christ had a body. And if we are all made to live in Christ as WE were made to DIE IN ADAM, then, as in the flesh we were made to DIE IN ADAM, so also in the flesh are we made to live in Christ. Otherwise, if the coming to life in Christ were not to take place in that same substance in which WE DIE IN ADAM, the parallel were imperfect. (Against Marcion 5:9:5, c. 210 AD)

ORIGEN (c. 244 AD)

EVERYONE in the world FALLS PROSTRATE under SIN. And it is the Lord who sets up those who are cast down and who sustains all who are falling [Psalm 145:14]. IN ADAM ALL DIE, and THUS the world FALLS PROSTRATE and requires to be SET UP AGAIN, so that in Christ all may be made to live [1 Cor 15:22]. (Homilies on Jeremias 8:1)

EVERY SOUL that is BORN into flesh is SOILED by the filth of wickedness and SIN....And if it should seem necessary to do so, there may be added to the aforementioned considerations [referring to previous Scriptures cited that we all sin] the fact that in the Church, Baptism is given FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS; and according to the usage of the Church, Baptism is given EVEN TO INFANTS. And indeed if there were nothing in infants which REQUIRED a remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of Baptism would seem SUPERFLUOUS. (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3)

The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism EVEN TO INFANTS. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the INNATE STAINS OF SIN, which must be WASHED AWAY through water and the Spirit [cf. John 3:5; Acts 2:38]. (Commentaries on Romans 5:9)

ST. CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE (c. 250 AD)

If, in the case of the worst sinners and of those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the REMISSION OF THEIR SINS is granted and no one is held back from Baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an INFANT not be held back, who, having but recently been BORN, has done no sin [committed no personal sin], EXCEPT THAT, BORN OF THE FLESH ACCORDING TO ADAM, HE HAS CONTRACTED THE CONTAGION OF THAT OLD DEATH FROM HIS FIRST BEING BORN. For this very reason does he approach more easily to receive the REMISSION OF SINS: because the SINS FORGIVEN HIM are NOT his OWN but THOSE OF ANOTHER [i.e. inherited from Adam]. (Letters 64:5 of Cyprian and his 66 colleagues in Council to Fidus)

ST. METHODIUS OF PHILIPPI (c. 300 AD)

Man too was CREATED WITHOUT CORRUPTION....But when it came about that he transgressed the commandment, he suffered a terrible and destructive fall and was reduced to a state of death. The Lord says that it was on this account that He Himself came down from heaven to the world, taking leave of the ranks and armies of the angels....It was to this end that the Word put on humanity: that He might overcome the serpent and that He might Himself put down the CONDEMNATION which had FIRST COME INTO BEING WHEN MAN WAS RUINED. For it was fitting that the evil one should be conquered not by another, but by that one whom he had deceived, and whom he was boasting that he held in subjection. In no other way could sin and condemnation be destroyed, except by that same man's being CREATED ANEW -- he of whom it was said: "Earth you are, and unto earth you shall return" [Gen 3:19] -- and by his undoing the sentence which, BECAUSE OF HIM [Adam], had been pronounced upon ALL. Thus, just as IN ADAM ALL DID FORMERLY DIE, so again in Christ, who put on Adam, ALL ARE MADE TO LIVE [1 Cor 15:22]. (The Banquet of the Ten Virgins or On Chastity 3:6)

APHRAATES THE PERSIAN SAGE (c. 340 AD)

For from Baptism we receive the Spirit of Christ. At that same moment in which the priests invoke the Spirit, heaven opens, and he descends and rests upon the waters; and those who are baptized are clothed in Him. For the Spirit is ABSENT from all those who are BORN OF THE FLESH, until they come to the WATER OF RE-BIRTH; and then they receive the Holy Spirit [cf. John 3:5; Acts 2:38]. Indeed, in the first birth they are born possessed of an animal spirit, which is created within man, nor afterwards does it ever die, for it is written: "Adam became a living soul" [cf. Gen 2:7; 1 Cor 15:45]. But in the second birth, that through Baptism, they receive the Holy Spirit from a particle of the Godhead; nor is He afterwards subject to death....Of all those who have been BORN and who have PUT ON FLESH, there is ONE ONLY who is INNOCENT: namely, our Lord Jesus Christ, who in fact testifies to such in His own regard [John 16:33; Isa 53:9; Mal 3:6; 2 Cor 5:21; Col 2:14; 1 Cor 9:24 are then alluded to or cited]....Moreover, among the SONS OF ADAM THERE IS NONE besides Him who might ENTER THE RACE [are born] WITHOUT BEING WOUNDED or swallowed up....For SIN has ruled from the time ADAM TRANSGRESSED THE COMMAND. By one among the many was it swallowed up; MANY [i.e. ALL as in Rom 5:18-19] DID IT WOUND, AND MANY DID IT KILL; but none among the many killed it until our Savior came, who took it on Himself and fixed it to His cross....Indeed, because the first human being gave ear and listened to the serpent, he received the sentence of malediction, by which he became food for the serpent; and the curse PASSED ON TO ALL HIS PROGENY. (Treatises 6:14; 7:1; 23:3)

ST. EPHRAIM OF SYRIA (c. 306 - 373 AD)

Adam sinned and EARNED ALL SORROWS, AND THE WORLD, FOLLOWING HIS LEAD, ALL GUILT. And it took no thought of how it might be restored, but only of how its fall might be made more pleasant for it. Glory to Him that came and restored it! (Hymns of the Epiphany 10:1)

ST. ATHANASIUS (c. 360 AD)

Adam, the first man, altered his course, and through sin death came into the world....When Adam transgressed, SIN reached out TO ALL MEN. (Discourses Against the Arians 1:51)

ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM (c. 350 AD)

The crown of the cross led into the light those who were blinded by ignorance, loosed all those who were chained by their sins, and redeemed the totality of men. Do not wonder that the whole world is redeemed. It was no mere man, but the only-begotten Son of God, who died on its behalf. Indeed, ONE MAN'S SIN, THAT OF ADAM, HAD THE POWER TO BRING DEATH TO THE WORLD. If by the transgression of one, death reigned over the world [Rom 5:17], why should not life more fittingly reign by the righteousness of one? If they were cast out of paradise because of the tree and the eating thereof, shall not believers now enter more easily into paradise because of the tree of Jesus? If that man first formed out of the earth USHERED IN UNIVERSAL DEATH, shall not He that formed him out of the earth bring in eternal life, since He Himself is Life? (Catechetical Lectures 13:1-2)

ST. BASIL THE GREAT (c. 379 AD)

Little given, much gotten; by the donation of food the ORIGINAL SIN IS DISCHARGED [Greek given by Jurgens]. JUST AS ADAM TRANSMITTED THE SIN by his wicked eating, we destroy that treacherous food when we cure the need and hunger of our brother.....For prisoners, Baptism is ransom, FORGIVENESS OF DEBTS, DEATH OF SIN, regeneration of the soul, a resplendent garment, an unbreakable seal, a chariot to heaven, a protector royal, a gift of adoption. (Eulogies on the Martyrs 8:7; 13:5)

DIDYMUS THE BLIND (c. 313 - 398 AD)

If Christ had received His body from a marital union and not in another way it would be supposed that he too is liable to an accounting for that SIN, WHICH, INDEED, ALL WHO ARE DESCENDED FROM ADAM CONTRACT IN SUCCESSION. [see Jurgens comment on this passage, vol 2, pg 64] (Against the Manicheans

ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM (c. 344 - 407 AD)

You see how many are the benefits of Baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins; but we have enumerated ten honors. For this reason we baptize even infants, THOUGH THEY ARE NOT DEFILED BY SIN [or though they do not HAVE PERSONAL SINS]: so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his members. (Baptismal Catechesis cited by St. Augustine in Contra Julian 1:6)

On this passage, St. Augustine remarks in Contra Julian 1:6:22 after quoting the above line in Greek:

"You see that he (John Chrysostom) certainly did not say, 'Infants are not defiled by sin,' or 'sins,' but, 'NOT HAVING SINS.' Understand 'of their own,' and there is no difficulty. 'But,' you will say, 'why did he not add "of their own" himself?' Why else, I suppose, if not that he was speaking in a Catholic church and never supposed he would be understood in any other way, when no one had raised such a question, and he could speak more unconcernedly when you were not there to dispute the point?"

Further, Jurgens comments that Julian of Eclanum had appealed to Chrysostom in support of Pelagianism by quoting the line above from -Ad neophytos- "We baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by sin" and he took this as a denial of original sin. However, Augustine had not just the Latin but the original GREEK of the same text which reads: "We baptize even infants, though they do not HAVE SINS." Augustine insists that the plural SINS makes it clear that Chrysostom was speaking of personal sins. Augustine further exonerates Chrysostom and deprives Julian of his source by quoting numerous other passages of Chrysostom.

Christ came once. He found OUR paternal note of hand, which Adam wrote. That man [Adam] brought in the beginning of the debt. We INCREASED the interest by OUR LATER sins. (cited by St. Augustine in Contra Julian 1:6:26, the original Greek of Chrysostom is given by Jurgens, vol 2, pg 101, n2)

Augustine comments: "Was he content to say 'the paternal note of hand,' without adding 'our?' He added the 'our' so that we might know that BEFORE we INCREASED the interest by our LATER sins, the debt of that paternal note of hand ALREADY pertained to us."

What does this mean, "Because all have sinned" [Rom 5:12] ? In that fall even those who did not eat of the tree -- ALL DID FROM THE TRANSGRESSION [of Adam] become mortal....For [Adam's sin in paradise] was productive of that death in which WE ALL participate....From this it is clear that it was not this sin, the sin of transgressing the Law, that ruined everything, BUT THAT SIN OF ADAM'S DISOBEDIENCE....What is the proof of this? The fact that even before the Law, ALL DIED. "Death reigned," he says, "from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned" [Rom 5:14a]. How did it reign? "In the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come" [Rom 5:14b]. This too is why Adam is a type of Christ: ....That when a Jew would say to you, "How by the righteous action of this one Man, Christ, was the world saved?" you might be able to answer him, "How by the wrong-doing of one Adam, WAS THE WORLD CONDEMNED?" (Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans 10:1)

Jurgens comments, vol 2, pg 115-116, n5 on the above and Rom 5:12 --

"Chrysostom knew Greek too, and he never supposed it meant anything except BECAUSE. He still refers the passage to original sin, and understands by the clause "because all have sinned" that what is meant is "because all have sinned [iN ADAM]." It is not just that all have sinned in sequence after Adam, but all have sinned in consequence of Adam.....The final clause clearly calls for the interpretation "because all have sinned IN ADAM." It need not exclude personal sin, but it must include original sin..... Chrysostom and the Fathers at large would have seen Rom 5:12 as referring to original sin. The mention of sin causing death, and death being therefore the lot of all men were enough; for it must be admitted that the Fathers in general do not easily distinguish between original sin and its effects. Thus, for Chrysostom, the very fact that men do die, even without the "because all have sinned," would point to original sin." (Note the following)

We have been freed from punishment, we have put off all wickedness, and we have been reborn from above [in Baptism, John 3:3,5], and we have risen again, with the old man buried, and we have been redeemed, and we have been sanctified, and we have been given adoption into sonship, and we have been justified, and we have been made brothers of the Only-begotten, and we have been constituted joint heirs and concorporeal with Him and have been perfected in his flesh, and have been united to Him as a body to its head....All of this Paul calls an "abundance of grace" [Rom 5:17], showing that what we have received is not just a medicine to counteract the WOUND, but even health and comeliness and honor and glory and dignities going far beyond what were natural to us. And each of these was able by itself to do away with death; but when all of them seem to run together at the same time, there is not a vestige of it left, nor a shadow of it to be seen, so completely has it disappeared....Christ paid out much more than the debt we owed, as much more as the boundless sea exceeds a little drop...."For just as by the disobedience of one man the many were MADE SINNERS, so too by the obedience of One, the many will be made just" [Rom 5:19]. ....What does the word "SINNERS" mean here? It seems to me that it means LIABLE TO PUNISHMENT AND CONDEMNED TO DEATH. (Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans 10:2)

ST. PACIAN OF BARCELONA (c. 392 AD)

After Adam sinned, as I noted before, when the Lord said, "You are earth, and to earth you shall return" [Gen 3:19], Adam was condemned to death. THIS CONDEMNATION PASSED ON TO THE WHOLE RACE. FOR ALL SINNED, ALREADY BY THEIR SHARING IN THAT NATURE [ipsa iam urgente natura], as the Apostle says: "For through one man sin made its entry, and through sin death, and thus it came down to all men, because all have sinned" [Rom 5:12, and see Jurgens note, vol 2, pg 144, n3]....Someone will say to me: But THE SIN OF ADAM DESERVEDLY PASSED ON TO HIS POSTERITY, because they were begotten of him: but how are we to be begotten of Christ, so that we can be saved through Him? Do not think of these things in a carnal fashion. You have already seen how we are begotten by Christ our Parent. In these last times Christ took a soul and with it flesh from Mary: this flesh came to prepare salvation.... (Sermons on Baptism 2; 6)

ST. AMBROSE OF MILAN (c. 383 AD)

Before we are born WE ARE INFECTED WITH THE CONTAGION, and before we see the light of day we experience the INJURY OF OUR ORIGIN. IN INIQUITY WE ARE CONCEIVED [cf. Psalm 51:5] -- he does not say whether the wickedness is of our parents or our own -- AND IN SINS each one's mother gives him life. Nor with this did he state whether his mother gave birth to him in her own sins or whether the sins of which he speaks pertain in some way to being born. But consider and see what is meant. NO CONCEPTION IS WITHOUT INIQUITY, since there are NO PARENTS WHO HAVE NOT FALLEN. And if there is NO INFANT WHO IS EVEN ONE DAY WITHOUT SIN, much less can the CONCEPTIONS of a mother's womb be WITHOUT SIN. We are conceived, therefore, in the sin of our parents, and it is in their sins that we are born. (Explanation of David the Prophet 1:11:56, Jurgens comments that in the above passage "the emphasis is upon concupiscence")

Adam was brought into being; and WE WERE ALL BROUGHT INTO BEING IN HIM. Adam perished and IN HIM ALL PERISHED. (Commentary on the Gospel of Luke 7:234, c. 389 AD)

AMBROSIASTER or Pseudo-Ambrose (c. 366 - 384 AD)

"In whom" -- that is, IN ADAM -- "all have sinned" [Rom 5:12]. And he said "in whom," using the masculine form, when he was speaking of a woman, because the reference was not to a specific individual but to the race. It is clear, therefore, that ALL HAVE SINNED IN ADAM, -en masse- as it were; for when he himself was corrupted by sin, all whom he begot were BORN UNDER SIN. On his account, then, all are sinners, because WE ARE ALL FROM HIM. He lost God's favor when he strayed. (Commentaries on 13 Pauline Epistles, In Rom 5:12, see also Jurgens comments vol 2, pg 179, n1-3)

ST. AUGUSTINE (c. 354 - 430 AD)

For by this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into His body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive, besides offering Himself as an example of righteousness for those who would imitate Him, gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. In a similar way Adam, IN WHOM ALL DIE [1 Cor 15:22], besides being an example for imitation to those who willfully transgress the commandment of the Lord, by the hidden depravity of his own carnal concupiscence, depraved in his own person all those who come from his stock...."Through one man," the Apostle says, "sin entered the world, through sin death" [Rom 5:12]. AND THIS REFERS NOT TO IMITATION BUT TO PROPAGATION....Unless we voluntarily depart from the rule of the Christian faith it must be admitted that inasmuch as infants are, by the Sacrament of Baptism, conformed to the death of Christ, they are also freed from the serpent's venomous bite. This bite, however, they did not receive in their own proper life but in him who first suffered that wound....IN ADAM ALL SINNED when, by that power innate in his nature, by which he was able to beget them, all were as yet the one Adam. (Forgiveness...and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 2:27:43; 3:7:14)

Concupiscence, which is atoned for [expiatur] only by the Sacrament of regeneration [baptism], does most certainly, by generation, pass on the bond of sin to the progeny, if they are not loosed from it by the same regeneration. For concupiscence itself is certainly no longer a sin in the regenerate, when they do not consent to illicit deeds and when their members are not applied by the ruling mind to the performance of such deeds....But because the guilt of concupiscence is prevalent in man who was born, that is called sin, in a certain manner of speaking, which was made by sin and which, if it conquers, produces sin. This guilt, however, through the remission of all sins, is not allowed to prevail in the man who is reborn, if he does not obey it when in some way it commands him to perform evil works....This concupiscence of the flesh is the daughter of sin, as it were, and, as often as it consents to shameful deeds, it is the mother of more sins. Whatever offspring is born of this concupiscence of the flesh is BOUND BY ORIGINAL SIN [originali est obligata peccato], unless it be REBORN in Him whom the Virgin conceived without that concupiscence; for which reason, when He designed to be born in the flesh, He ALONE WAS BORN WITHOUT SIN....Marriage is not the cause of the sin which comes with being born and is expiated in being reborn [at Baptism]; rather, THE WILLFUL SIN OF THE FIRST MAN IS THE CAUSE OF ORIGINAL SIN [voluntarium peccatum hominis primi originalis est causa peccati]....Why, then, does [Julian] ask us: "Whence is it that sin is found in an infant: through will, or through marriage, or through his parents?"....For all this the Apostle has an answer. He accuses neither the will of the infant, which is not yet matured in him for sinning; nor marriage as such, which has not only its institution from God, but a blessing as well; nor parents as such, who are licitly and legitimately joined together for the procreation of children. Rather, he says:

"THROUGH ONE MAN SIN CAME INTO THIS WORLD, AND THROUGH SIN DEATH, AND THUS IT PASSED THROUGH INTO ALL MEN, FOR IN HIM ALL HAVE SINNED." [Rom 5:12, see Jurgens comment, vol 3, pg 138, n22]

"If sin," [Julian] says, "is from the will, the will is evil because it does sin; but if it is from nature, nature is evil." I quickly respond: "Sin is from the will." He asks, perhaps, "And ORIGINAL SIN too?" And I answer: "Absolutely original sin too. Because this too was sown by the WILL OF THE FIRST MAN, so that it existed in him and PASSED ON TO ALL." (Marriage and Concupiscence 1:23:25; 24:27; 2:26:43; 27:44-45; 28:4

You are convicted on every side. The numerous testimonies in regard to original sin, testimonies of the saints, are clearer than daylight. Look what an assembly it is into which I have brought you. Here is Ambrose of Milan....here too is John of Constantinople [Chrysostom]... Here is Basil...Here are others too, whose general agreement is so great that it ought to move you. This is not, as you write with an evil pen, "a conspiracy of the lost." They were famous in the Catholic Church for their pursuit of sound doctrine. Armed and girded with spiritual weapons, they waged strenuous wars against the heretics; and when they had faithfully completed the labors appointed them, they fell asleep in the lap of peace....See where I have brought you: the assembly of those saints is no common rabble. They are not only sons but also fathers of the Church....Holy and blessed priests, widely reknowned for their diligence in divine eloquence, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Reticius, Olympius, Hilary, Ambrose, Gregory, Innocent, John, Basil -- and whether you like it or not, I will add the presbyter Jerome, while omitting those who are still alive -- have pronounced against you their opinion about original sin in the guilty succession of all men, whence no one is exempted except Him that the Virgin conceived without the law of sin warring against the law of the mind....What they found in the Church, they kept; what they learned, they taught; what they received from the fathers, they handed on to the sons. We were never involved with you before these judges; but our case has been tried before them. Neither we nor you were known to them; we but recite their judgments delivered in our favor against you.....These men are bishops, learned, grave, holy, and most zealous defenders of the truth against garrulous vanities, in whose reason, erudition, and freedom, three qualities you demand in a judge, you can find nothing to despise....With such planters, waterers, builders, shepherds, and fosterers the holy Church grew after the time of the Apostles. (Against Julian 1:7:30-31; 2:10:33-34; 2:10:37)

 More here:

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/christian-discussion/62101-doctrine-original-sin-church-fathers.html

 

Here is on from the bible alone.

 

There are several lines of biblical evidence for the historic Christian doctrine that we are all born into the world with sinful natures, due to the sin of Adam.

 

Scripture says that we are born sinners and that we are by nature sinners

Psalm 51:5 states that we all come into the world as sinners: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me." Ephesians 2:2 says that all people who are not in Christ are "sons of disobedience." Ephesians 2:3 also establishes this, saying that we are all "by nature children of wrath." If we are all "by nature children of wrath," it can only be because we are all by nature sinners--for God does not direct His wrath towards those who are not guilty. God did not create the human race sinful, but upright. But we fell into sin and became sinful due to the sin of Adam.

 

Scripture speaks of humans as unrighteous from infancy

There are also verses which declare that we are all unrighteous from the time that we are born. Proverbs 22:15 says "Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child." Genesis 8:21 declares, "...the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth." Jonathon Edwards, in his classic work The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin Defended, remarks that on this verse: "The word translated youth, signifies the whole of the former part of the age of man, which commences from the beginning of life. The word in its derivation, has reference to the birth or beginning of existence...so that the word here translated youth, comprehends not only what we in English most commonly call the time of youth, but also childhood and infancy."

 

Humanity is Often Described in General Terms as Unrighteous

Unrighteousness is often spoken of in Scripture as something belonging to the human race as a whole.This implies that it is the property of our species. In other words, sinfulness is considered a property of human nature after the fall. Thus, it must be concluded that we are all born sinners, since we are all born human and sin is regarded as a property of humanity. In this vein, consider Ephesians 2:1-3:

 

And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

 

Paul is here reminding Christians of what they were like before their conversion to Christ ("you were dead in your trespasses...in which you formerly walked"). Thus, all people, until and unless they are converted, are sinners. Paul goes on to make it absolutely clear that all Christians came from this state ("...we to all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh") and that all non-Christians are still in this state ("...and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.") Thus, Scripture regards all people before they are saved by Christ as sinners and thus deserving of punishment from God. Which is to say that from the inception of our existence, we are sinful.

 

In Psalm 14:2, 3 we read: "The Lord has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one." Here again we see unrighteousness as a property of the human race: "they have all turned aside...there is no one who does good."

 

Job 15:14 similarly declares that sinfulness is a property of humanity: "What is man, that he should be pure, or he who is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?" Verses 15-16 then speaks of the human race as a whole in shocking terms expressing our general corruption: "Behold, He puts no trust in His holy ones, And the heavens are not pure in His sight; How much less one who is detestable and corrupt, Man, who drinks iniquity like water!"

 

Jeremiah 17:9 says that "the heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it." This seems to assume original sin--wickedness is a property of the human heart. Ecclesiastes 9:3 declares a similar truth: "...the hearts of the sons of men are full of evil, and insanity is in their hearts through their lives." Again, the human heart is sinful, and therefore all humans are sinful.

 

These texts indicate, then, that human nature is corrupt. Therefore, even infants are corrupt because they are human. And if infants are corrupt, then this is the same as saying that we are born corrupt--which means we are born with original sin. One may, however, object that these texts speak nothing of infants, only those who are old enough to make moral decisions. All of those people are sinful, but this doesn't mean that infants are.

 

This is an ingenious objection, but it does not succeed. First, the texts do not seem to restrict themselves to people who are old enough to make intelligent decisions. They seem to speak of human nature as a whole, a classification under which infants certainly fall. Second, as Jonathan Edwards pointed out, "..this would not alter the case...For if all mankind, as soon as ever they are capable of reflecting, and knowing their own moral state, find themselves wicked, this proves that they are wicked by nature."

 

In other words, even if these verses were only speaking of people old enough to mentally understand sin, they would still be teaching original sin. For on that view, these verses would be saying that all people, as soon as they know good from evil, find themselves sinners. But if all people, as soon as they are capable of moral decisions, find themselves sinners, this proves that they are that way by nature.

 

Third, Edwards also says, "why should man be so continually spoken of as evil, carnal, perverse, deceitful, and desperately wicked, if all men are by nature as perfectly innocent, and free form any propensity to evil, as Adam was the first moment of his creation?" (Edwards, The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin, 188).

 

Infants die, therefore they are not innocent

Death--both physical and spiritual--is a result of sin (Romans 5:12; 6:23). Thus, death only comes upon those who have sinned. Since infants die, they therefore must be sinners. It could be objected that Christ was sinless, and yet He died. But He willingly gave up His life, and He did it to conquer the curse of death that we were under. In fact, God imputed to Christ our sins on the cross, and Christ died in punishment of those sins.

 

If humanity is not born in sin, wouldn't we expect there to be some people who have "beaten the odds" and never sinned?

If we are born innocent and good, why aren't there at least some people who have continued in this state and remained sinless? The fact that everybody sins needs some explanation. The best explanation is that we are sinners by nature. Someone might argue that the reason all people sin is because society is sinful, and thus society renders it impossible for anybody to keep themselves entirely pure. But that only pushes the question back one step. How did society get sinful in the first place? If people are born morally good, then how did it come about that they congregated into socities that influence all people to sin?

 

While article here:

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/what-is-the-biblical-evidence-for-original-sin

 

Also babies who die don't go to hell. Babies are protected by invincible ignorance as they can't choose redemption and don't know what they do when they sin. Quite simply they are safe until they reach a certain age, not sure what exactly.

 

Finally andalusi your own beliefs contradict the bible far more.

 

I won't post the link a skater on the article gets ugly later on.

. I. The Doctrine of God

Islam correctly opposes idolatry and teaches that there is only one God. But more is needed (James 2:19). So consider further:

A. Islam Says Jesus Is Not Divine.

Muhammad taught there is only one Divine Being in God. He denied the Deity of Jesus, saying He was just a man - a great prophet, but not the Divine Son of God. (Qur’an 4:162-171; 6:100,101; 19:88-92)

The Bible says Jesus is Divine.

John 1:1,14 - Jesus (the Word) was God, was with God in the beginning, and became flesh to dwell among men as a man.

Colossians 2:9 - In Jesus dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

John 20:28,29 - Thomas called Jesus "my Lord and my God." Jesus pronounced a blessing on all others who believe the same (cf. vv 30,31).

How can Muslims deny these teachings and yet claim to believe the Bible is true and Jesus was a prophet?

[Phil. 2:6-8; Heb. 1:8,9; Tit. 2:13; Isa. 9:6; John 8:58; 5:23]

The Bible says Jesus is the Only-Begotten Son of God.

Matthew 16:13-17 - During His lifetime many people believed what Muslims today believe: that Jesus was a great prophet like other prophets. But Peter confessed that Jesus was not just a man but was the Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus Himself affirmed that Peter's statement had been revealed by God.

John 10:35 - Jesus plainly admitted that He had said, "I am the Son of God."

Matthew 17:5; 3:17 - Twice God spoke from heaven and claimed Jesus as His beloved Son. Bible writers claimed to be eyewitnesses that these things were true (2 Peter 1:16-18).

Romans 1:4 - The resurrection declared Jesus to be the Son of God.

To believe that Jesus was just a great man and a prophet is to belittle Him and to deny His own statements. To believe some other man was as great as Jesus is to blaspheme Him. If Jesus spoke the truth, then He was more than a prophet.

Muslims must either admit that Jesus was the Divine Son of God, or else they must admit they do not believe that Jesus and the Bible are true.

[John 3:16; 1:14; 3:18; 1 John 4:9; Colossians 1:15,18; Eph. 1:19-22; 1 Corinthians 15:23-28]

The Bible says Jesus has Divine characteristics.

He was eternal - Micah 5:2 [isa. 9:6]

He was all-knowing - John 16:30; 21:17

He was all-powerful over created things - Matt. 28:18; Rev. 19:16; 17:14; Acts 10:36; Rom. 10:12; John 3:31; Rom. 9:5.

How could these characteristics be possessed by a mere man? Are these things true of Muhammad? If not, then how could he be as great as Jesus?

The Bible says Jesus is the Creator of the universe and the Judge of mankind.

John 1:3 - All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. [Heb. 1:2; Col. 1:16,17]

John 5:22,23 - The Father has committed all judgment to the Son.

2 Corinthians 5:10 - Jesus will be our judge; we must all appear before Him. Jesus will be Muhammad's judge! How can Muhammad be as great? [Acts 17:31; Matt. 25:31ff]

What mere human prophet could create the universe or judge all mankind? Muhammad makes no such claims. These are the claims of a Divine Being. How can Muslims deny these teachings and yet claim to believe the Bible is true and Jesus was a prophet?

The Bible says Jesus accepted worship.

Jesus taught that no one but God should be worshipped (Matt. 4:10). Both men and angels in the New Testament refused to allow people to bow in worship to them (Acts 10:25,26; Rev. 22:8,9).

Matthew 28:9,17; Hebrews 1:6 - However, Jesus' disciples worshipped Him, and angels are commanded by God to worship Him. [Cf. Rev. 5:12-14; Luke 24:52]

Jesus accepted worship such as was forbidden to man. How can Islam believe the Bible and believe Jesus was from God, while denying that He deserved worship? When they claim that Jesus was just a human prophet and that Muhammad was as great a prophet as Jesus, the Scripture says they are unbelievers (John 20:30,31; 8:24; Mark 16:16).

Islam is like a man who views a building from a great distance. He can tell there is only one building, but a closer view would reveal that it has three stories. So Islam correctly affirms there is only one God, but the greater revelation of New Testament shows that this one God consists of three separate and distinct individual spirit Beings.

 

I know you believe the bible to be corrupt so let's move to that. What evidence do you have for this corruption? Besides a few minor differences in grammar, the new testament remains the same as that from the 1st and 2nd century. And all of those differences can be fixed with minor effort. I remember reading a study that went overper this but I can't find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

where does bible say that he shall come from israel? show us evidence

 

it clearly say from your brethren, and jew and arabs are bretheren, since Isaac(israelites) and Ishmael(arabs) are brothers.

 

so it can only be fromisraelites or arabs, and in this case arabs.

 

But in scripture the only time non Jews are called brethren is once when God said not to attack Edom. Here is the verse.

 

Numbers 20:14

And Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom, Thus said your brother israel, You know all the travail that has befallen us:

—AKJV

 

In Deuteronomy ( in place of brethren these quotes use kindred) here are all the uses of the word.

 

Deuteronomy 15:7 If one of your kindred is in need in any community in the land which the LORD, your God, is giving you, you shall not harden your heart nor close your hand against your kin who is in need.

 

This is obviously referring to a Jew. Since it says in the Jews promised land.

 

Deuteronomy 17:15 you may indeed set over you a king whom the LORD, your God, will choose. Someone from among your own kindred you may set over you as king; you may not set over you a foreigner, who is no kin of yours.

 

Again this is about a Jew. As far a I know there was no Arab king of israel. Here kinder again means from israel.

 

Deuteronomy 17:20 so that he does not exalt himself over his kindred or turn aside from this commandment to the right or to the left, and so that he and his descendants may reign long in israel.

 

This is again about the king of israel. It means that the king should follow The Law so he is not above his kindred the Jews. The Arabs did not follow The Law and so if kindred meant Arab or Jew why bother following The Law? The Arabs their "kindred" didn't do it. Moving on.

 

Deuteronomy 18:2 They shall have no heritage among their kindred; the LORD himself is their heritage, as he has told them.

 

Deuteronomy 18:2 They shall have no heritage among their kindred; the LORD himself is their heritage, as he has told them.

 

Deuteronomy 18:2 They shall have no heritage among their kindred; the LORD himself is their heritage, as he has told them.

 

This is on the levite priests. It implies that normal Jews had heritage with their kindred. As fr as I know Jews did not share heritage with the arabs.

 

Deuteronomy 23:20 You shall not demand interest from your kindred on a loan of money or of food or of anything else which is loaned.

Deuteronomy 23:21 From a foreigner you may demand interest, but you may not demand interest from your kindred, so that the LORD, your God, may bless you in all your undertakings on the land you are to enter and possess.

 

Deuteronomy 23:22 When you make a vow to the LORD, your God, you shall not delay in fulfilling it; for the LORD, your God, will surely require it of you and you will be held guilty.

 

Jews were not supposed to charge interest on other Jews. Here is a scriptural example. Nehemiah 5:7 After some deliberation, I called the nobles and magistrates to account, saying to them, “You are exacting interest from your own kindred!”* I then rebuked them severely,

 

Here is the Jewish view on interest on other Jews.

http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/15823/why-usury-or-interest-on-loan-is-illegal-within-jews-and-legal-for-non-jews

 

Deuteronomy 24:14 You shall not exploit a poor and needy hired servant, whether one of your own kindred or one of the resident aliens who live in your land, within your gates.

This doesn't indicate either way whether it means Jews or non Jews as it applies the same rules to both.

 

So from what we have seen kindred doesn't refer to Arabs in Deuteronomy.

 

Here is from a Jewish text on this passage. Deuteronomy 18:15-19 contains God's promise that He will raise up a prophet like Moses that the people of israel must heed. The first issue to be addressed here is whether or not this passage refers specifically to the Messiah.

A number of medieval Jewish interpreters believe the coming prophet to be a particular future prophet but not the Messiah. Abarbanel held that Jeremiah was the prophet like Moses, while Ibn Ezra applied the prophecy to Joshua. However, Moses was a prophet of deliverance, whereas Jeremiah was a prophet of doom. Joshua was also unlike Moses in respect to mediation and direct revelation. Additionally, it should be noted that in Deuteronomy 34, immediately after the description of Joshua (Deut 34:9), the writer says that no prophet had arisen like Moses (Deut 34:10), obviously disqualifying Joshua as the referent. Other interpreters see prophet like Moses as referring to the institution of the office of prophet.

 

Dr. Michael Rydelnik

Born Brooklyn, 1957. Resident of Illinois.

Bible scholar.

 

Another view holds that a prophet like Moses refers exclusively to the Messiah. In support of this view are the following:

 

(a) The singular use of navi with singular suffixes points to a specific individual. Generally, when the collective sense is intended, it is common to interchange singular and plural forms.

(b) The prophet is compared to a single, exalted individual: Moses. Hence, the fulfillment must be a single, exalted individual.

© In the history of the Tenach period, no ordinary prophet exercised the legislative, executive, priestly, or mediatorial authority that Moses did.

(d) The prophet who is like Moses had to be so special an individual that only the Messiah could fulfill the qualifications (Num 12:6-8; Deut 34:10).

(e) Other messianic passages in Torah (e.g. Gen 49:10; Num 24:17-19) provide a broader context which allows for Deut 18:15-19 to be messianic.

 

It is necessary to examine how the Tenach itself viewed Deut 18:15-19. In so doing, it will become apparent that many years after Moses gave this prophecy to israel, the Tenach itself continued to look for a Moses-like eschatological prophet.

 

The Innertextual Considerations

There are two passages that give innertextual insight into the meaning of Deut 18:15-19: one written by Moses himself and the other by a writer at a much later date.

 

Numbers 12:6-8

This passage is significant because it defines what is meant by "a prophet like me [Moses]." The context of this passage lays the foundation for understanding Moses' uniqueness. In Num 11:16-30, the story is told of God establishing the seventy elders of israel and confirming them by giving them the Spirit that Moses had (11:17) and allowing them to prophecy as Moses did (11:25). In Num 12:1-5, the account of Aaron and Miriam speaking against Moses is reported. Their complaint was that God also spoke through them as prophets and not solely through Moses. God's defense of Moses is reported in Num 12:6-8, where God delineates Moses' uniqueness:

 

Hear now my words: If there is a prophet of the LORD among you, I will make myself known to him with visions, and I will speak with him in dreams. Not so with my servant Moses; in all my house, he is faithful. Face to face I speak with him even openly and not in dark sayings, And he beholds the form of the Lord; so why were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses'

 

The point is clear. Despite the proliferation of prophecy to the elders and to Miriam and Aaron, Moses remained unique as God's prophet and servant. This was so because God spoke directly with Moses, unlike the way He spoke with other prophets. Num 12:6-8 establishes a significant innertextual foundation for interpreting Deut 18:15-19 by explaining what is meant by a prophet like Moses. Whoever that prophet would be, he would be required to speak to God face to face.

 

Full article here. http://messiah.com.es/alphabet/deuteronomy18.html

 

So kindred points towards the person being an israelite and Jewish scholarship thinks its either a Jewish prophet or the messiah who both you and I agree is Jesus.

 

On the rest of your post I'm not understanding what you are saying. Please clarify.

Edited by Heavens Fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont understand that text

 

i want you to explain to me why your belief is logical and why am i wrong

 

why is original sin logical to you, can you respond to my previous posts with your own word not kilometer long text from others

Edited by andalusi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok then.

 

It is logical to me because it is in scripture.

 

Romans 5:12-19

New International Version (NIV)

Death Through Adam, Life Through Christ

 

12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

 

13 To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.

 

15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16 Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

 

18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

 

Corinthians 1 15:20-22

20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

 

The early church fathers also described original sin.

 

St. Irenaeus (c. 180 AD)

....having become disobedient, [Eve] was made the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race; so also Mary, betrothed to a man but nevertheless still a virgin, being obedient, was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race....Thus, the knot of Eve's disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. What the virgin Eve had bound in unbelief, the Virgin Mary loosed through faith. ...But this man [of whom I have been speaking] is Adam, if truth be told, the first-formed man....WE, however, are all FROM him; and as WE are FROM him, WE have INHERITED his title [of sin]. ...Indeed, THROUGH the first Adam, WE offended God by not observing His command. Through the second Adam(Jesus), however, we are reconciled, and are made obedient even unto death. For we were debtors to none other except to Him, whose commandment WE transgressed at the beginning. (Against Heresies 3:22:4; 3:23:2; 5:16:3)

 

Theophilus of Antioch

 

 

 

"For the first man, disobedience resulted in his expulsion from paradise. It was not as if there were any evil in the tree of knowledge; but from disobedience man drew labor, pain, grief, and, in the end, he fell prostrate in death" (Ad Autolycus 2:25 [A.D. 181]).'

 

Tertullian

 

 

 

"On account of his [Adam’s] transgression man was given over to death; and the whole human race, which was infected by his seed, was made the transmitter of condemnation" (The Testimony of the Soul 3:2 [inter A.D. 197-200]).

 

Finally it has been decided by the Church which Christ promised would be guided by him.

 

Matthew 16:18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, * and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

 

Matthew 16:19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.* Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

 

Matthew 16:20 m Then he strictly ordered his disciples to tell no one that he was the Messiah.

 

The keys of heaven have been given to the church. Now Christians argue to what degree but in this discussion it is insignificant. Any other Catholics or Orthodox with more knowledge of this, please weigh in. I am still new at this.

Edited by Heavens Fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok then.

 

It is logical to me because it is in scripture.

 

Romans 5:12-19

New International Version (NIV)

Death Through Adam, Life Through Christ

 

12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

 

i will comment only this part It is logical to me because it is in scripture.

 

so if scripture say to you 1+1+1=1 then it is logical just beacuse scripture tell you

 

ooh man, what kind of logic is that?????

 

but dont you know that your scripture confirms what i say

 

 Jeremiah 8:8 

"'How can you say, "We are wise because we have the word of the LORD," when your teachers have twisted it by writing lies?

 

so even your scripture says to you that it contains lies and i Point out what is wrong with it, and you still Believe in it, even though jesus say that Children will go to paradise in other Words there is no original sin, if the inherited this sin how could they then go to paradise. 

 

so that is absolutly not logical that someone make mistake and we punish the other, where is logic in that, that is not logic that is "raping of your intelect" that is what it is. not logic.

 

that is th eproblem with you christian you dont question stuff wich are illogical, you Believe blindly Everything the told you, but we muslims dont Believe blindly in anything, we Believe beacuse we see evidence and then we Believe , there is no room for blind belief in our faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i will comment only this part It is logical to me because it is in scripture.

 

so if scripture say to you 1+1+1=1 then it is logical just beacuse scripture tell you

 

ooh man, what kind of logic is that?????

 

but dont you know that your scripture confirms what i say

 

Jeremiah 8:8

"'How can you say, "We are wise because we have the word of the LORD," when your teachers have twisted it by writing lies?

 

so even your scripture says to you that it contains lies and i Point out what is wrong with it, and you still Believe in it, even though jesus say that Children will go to paradise in other Words there is no original sin, if the inherited this sin how could they then go to paradise.

 

so that is absolutly not logical that someone make mistake and we punish the other, where is logic in that, that is not logic that is "raping of your intelect" that is what it is. not logic.

 

that is th eproblem with you christian you dont question stuff wich are illogical, you Believe blindly Everything the told you, but we muslims dont Believe blindly in anything, we Believe beacuse we see evidence and then we Believe , there is no room for blind belief in our faith.

It was taught by christ's apostles. Not some man 6 centuries post facto saying "he actually meant this" Look at the quotes of the church fathers. Many of them were taught by the apostles students. Irenaeus for example. They agree with me.

 

Here is logic behind original sin. It is not by me but sums up my views.

The doctrine of OS might be illogical if it's reasonable to assume that all human sin we presently observe is normal-IOW not sin at all. But somehow I have a hard time believing that humans, capable of love and kindness, are also naturally endowed with the proclivity for such things as genocide, rape, and torture, sometimes committed in widespread fashion by otherwise normal folk. There's too much contrast here, something beyond reason, not as it "should be", when we have humans committing deliberate, ruthless acts purposely chosen for the very intention of maximizing pain and humiliation , acts that would put the behavior of the most vicious animal to shame. Let alone the ordinary greed and selfishness that every day leads to major and minor acts of embezzlement, gossip, theft, adultery, etc. Something's missing, and that “something” isn't something bad, as if OS makes us dirty-it just makes us unable to control ourselves, to "cooperate" with our own true natures, as we all possess a suspicion that we may actually benefit more if we place self first, above all else, and this is essentially how we're born.

 

The fact is that a sentient, rational being with free will is hard-pressed to willingly, continuously control himself unless this “something” is no longer missing. The essence of Original Sin is man’s separation from God, God being, among other things, the foundational logos and purpose behind nature and the universe. Man is cut off from nature; he already senses this fact, but isn’t sure if he should care or not. But he should care, because it means he’s cut off from his own nature as well: lost, not knowing where he came from, if anywhere, what he’s here for, if anything, and where he’s going, if anywhere. Unless he finds his way back home, to God, he remains lost. That’s a statement of faith, but it just happens to be the truth.

 

Jesus came to demonstrate the alternative worldview to mans preferred viewpoint, one which leaves man in full “control” of his world, for better or worse, but ultimately for the worse, ultimately leading to chaos, destruction, futility and meaninglessness. He did this so we have a choice, without violating our free will, to the extent we’re willing to make the choice, between right and wrong, good and evil, life or death. Jesus demonstrated: God’s existence, His power, His humility (amazingly), His uncompromising trustworthiness and unconditional love for man-He placed love, in fact, at center stage, making it the gold standard, the highest value in the universe- and He simultaneously proclaimed the reality of it's opposite, human sin, God’s forgiveness of sin, and man’s powerlessness to refrain from it without direct, immediate relationship, or communion, with Him.

 

If there were no God, then it would all be a fairy tale, but, in the case of the Christian gospel, not one that anyone would've bothered to make up IMO.

 

On the jerehmiah quote. In what ways have I twisted the scripture? I have given you scriptural verses on why original sin is biblical. Please show how I twisted Scripture. Also that verse does not say that scripture contains lies. It says that people can twist scripture to their own ends. Because of this I have shown you quotes by the early church fathers who were much closer to the time and were taught their interpretation of scripture by the apostles students.

 

On Jesus saying children will inherit the kingdom here is what the Catholic Church has to say.

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them," 64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism. - The Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

Now my counterpoint. Why should I believe Mohammad? He came 600 years after the fact and had absolutely no basis in previous revelation. I have shown how Deuteronomy did not prophesy him. Why should I follow him?.

 

Finally...

that is th eproblem with you Muslims you dont question stuff wich are illogical, you Believe blindly Everything Muhammad told you, but we Christians dont Believe blindly in anything, we Believe beacuse we see evidence and then we Believe , there is no room for blind belief in our faith.

 

...stop with the petty insults. They don't prove your point and turn a healthy dialogue into an insult fight.

Edited by Heavens Fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It was taught by christ's apostles. Not some man 6 centuries post facto saying "he actually meant this" Look at the quotes of the church fathers. Many of them were taught by the apostles students. Irenaeus for example. They agree with me.

 

 

show me evidence that Christ apostles talked about it, and by the way even if they did, then i ask you this question

 

If i rob a bank, shall we put you in jail for that? is that ok that you will be punished for my sin? if not then why is it ok to be punished for Adam's sin.

 

 

 

 

 

On Jesus saying children will inherit the kingdom here is what the Catholic Church has to say.

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them," 64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism. - The Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

but you claim we all inherit sins even those Children, so how can they go to paradise if they have sins?

 

so now mercy of God is also salvation, you dont even need Jesus on the cross, right?

 

 

 

 

Now my counterpoint. Why should I believe Mohammad? He came 600 years after the fact and had absolutely no basis in previous revelation. I have shown how Deuteronomy did not prophesy him. Why should I follow him?.

 

no, you have not shown me deutronomy that it was not Muhammed.

 

i clearly show you that it was not Jeremiah, beacuse bible clearly say it is not he, Jeremiah lived somwhere 500 years Before jesus

 

and jews still expected this prophet wich God promsied during time of Moses 

 

 John 1:21 

And they asked him(John the Baptist), What then? Are you Elijah? And he said, I am not. Are you that prophet? And he answered, No.

 

 

NOW QUESTION FOR YOU, IF JEREMIAH WAS THAT PROPHET WHO LIVED LONG BEFORE JESUS, WHY WOULD JEWS ASK JOHN THE BAPTIST ARE YOU THAT PROPHET IF JEREMIAH FULLFILED THAT PROPHECY? THEY STILL EXPECTED THIS PROPHET, THAT IS WHY JEREMIAH WAS NOT THAT PROPHET. THAT IS WHY YOU ARE WRONG

 

 John 1:25 

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

 

so we see that jews expected Christ(Jesus), Elias(John the baptist), and That prophet (Muhammed)

 

it would be really strange that they repeated themselves that christ and prophet is the same,

 

it is like

Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that human, nor animal, neither that man?

 

human and man are same, but not animal, so christ and prophet are two different persons in this text. do you understand what i want to say to you?

Edited by andalusi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andalusi- Mashallah some really good arguments and points.

Heavens Fire- stop blind following the scripture if it clearly does not explain the points or can back them up.

 

You know Muhammad was the Prophet and you should accept this and accept Islam.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andalusi. I already have shown you where the apostles taught it. Look up to the post where I has scripture verses on the doctrine were given.

 

On your analogy, I think that is a bad example. Let's say you and I are brothers. Our parents tell us to always go to bed by 9:30. However you always disobey. You are never caught and not punished for it. Because of this I begin to think it is okay to disobey our parents. In effect I lose my innocence. Eventually both you and I are put in jail for stealing from a store as we don't expect to be punished by our parents.

 

That is what original sin is like. Adams disobedience has caused the human race to lose its innocence. Through baptism Adams disobedience is washed away and some of our innocence restored. However we still live in a fallen world and can still sin. That is where Christ's sacrifice comes in.

 

On the baby's, no that is not why they at saved. God knows that as babies they cannot choose to baptize themselves. If they are not baptized it is not their fault.

 

I showed you every place in Deuteronomy where the word brethren ( or kindred) is used. In all these places it refers to the jews. Deuteronomy does not speak of Muhammad.

 

Thanks for the help with Jerehmiah. I wasn't sure how to answer the Jew's reply. That should do it.

 

On John, from what I can find that verse means that the Jews were asking whether he was a new prophet. God never sent a prophet to tell the jews exactly how many prophets there would be.( at least from what I know)

Here is a good commentary. http://m.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/john-1-25.html

Also if the Jews expected a Messiah and then a Prophet, than this belief should still live on in rabbinical Judaism. However from what I know of Jews, they do not.

 

On the contrary Doc, I know Muhammad was not the prophet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andalusi. I already have shown you where the apostles taught it. Look up to the post where I has scripture verses on the doctrine were given.

 

On your analogy, I think that is a bad example. Let's say you and I are brothers. Our parents tell us to always go to bed by 9:30. However you always disobey. You are never caught and not punished for it. Because of this I begin to think it is okay to disobey our parents. In effect I lose my innocence. Eventually both you and I are put in jail for stealing from a store as we don't expect to be punished by our parents.

 

That is what original sin is like. Adams disobedience has caused the human race to lose its innocence. Through baptism Adams disobedience is washed away and some of our innocence restored. However we still live in a fallen world and can still sin. That is where Christ's sacrifice comes in.

 

On the baby's, no that is not why they at saved. God knows that as babies they cannot choose to baptize themselves. If they are not baptized it is not their fault.

 

I showed you every place in Deuteronomy where the word brethren ( or kindred) is used. In all these places it refers to the jews. Deuteronomy does not speak of Muhammad.

 

Thanks for the help with Jerehmiah. I wasn't sure how to answer the Jew's reply. That should do it.

 

On John, from what I can find that verse means that the Jews were asking whether he was a new prophet. God never sent a prophet to tell the jews exactly how many prophets there would be.( at least from what I know)

Here is a good commentary. http://m.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/john-1-25.html

Also if the Jews expected a Messiah and then a Prophet, than this belief should still live on in rabbinical Judaism. However from what I know of Jews, they do not.

 

On the contrary Doc, I know Muhammad was not the prophet.

 

 

 

Andalusi. I already have shown you where the apostles taught it. Look up to the post where I has scripture verses on the doctrine were given.

 

does not matter who said it, even if Muhammed himself said something illogical , like 1+1=5 we cant accept that, Religion of God must be logical and intlectually accepted otherwise what kind of relgion is that when 1+1+1=1 ??? we are not sheeps who accept religion blindly

 

 

 

 

On your analogy, I think that is a bad example. Let's say you and I are brothers. Our parents tell us to always go to bed by 9:30. However you always disobey. You are never caught and not punished for it. Because of this I begin to think it is okay to disobey our parents. In effect I lose my innocence. Eventually both you and I are put in jail for stealing from a store as we don't expect to be punished by our parents.

 

That is what original sin is like. Adams disobedience has caused the human race to lose its innocence.

 

no, that is not logical at all, beacuse Adam sin goes on all of us according to your if you see me doing something bad and you follow my steps of course you are responsible for that. even Islam says that if someone do something wrong and other follows him in that deed, the first man gets sins of others,  sins are copied to him from them even though sins of wrongdoers are not descreased at all. 

 

 

 

 

On the baby's, no that is not why they at saved. God knows that as babies they cannot choose to baptize themselves. If they are not baptized it is not their fault.

 

but your logic is very terrible, if pabtizing is key to salvation and paradise /kingdom of heaven then how could other people Before jesus and John the baptist go to paradise without baptism 

 

 

you bible goes against you

 

 

 Matthew 8:11 

And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

 

cant you see that you allways go against logic and your holy book

 

how could Abraham, Isaac, Jacob go to paradise if they are not baptized???

 

 

 

 

I showed you every place in Deuteronomy where the word brethren ( or kindred) is used. In all these places it refers to the jews. Deuteronomy does not speak of Muhammad.
 
no you did not, brethren are Isacc offsprings (jews) and Ishmaels offsprings (arabs) so if a prophet is jew or arab then prophescy is fullfiled.
 
 
Why would jews expect that prophet during time of Jesus and John? why would they ask for 3 person, Christ, Elijah and that prophet?
 
who fullfilled this prophecy then if not muhammed?
 
if you say Jesus fullfilled it, then why would they ask are you the Christ, he answers NO and then they asked are you that prophet, he answered No?
 
if Christ and that prophet are same then why would they repeat themselves, if he allready answered No when they asked about Christ.
 
Let me give you an example, if i ask you, are you a Man, you say yes, then i ask you ,are you a HUman?
 
is it logical that i repeat myself like this??? no, then it is not logical that they repeat themselves also.
 
 
 

 

On John, from what I can find that verse means that the Jews were asking whether he was a new prophet. God never sent a prophet to tell the jews exactly how many prophets there would be.( at least from what I know)

Here is a good commentary. http://m.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/john-1-25.html

Also if the Jews expected a Messiah and then a Prophet, than this belief should still live on in rabbinical Judaism. However from what I know of Jews, they do not. 

 

the Christ is prophet , but That prophet means someone else not Christ. it is not logical to repeat themselves.  just like i would not ask you if you are a man, you say no, and then i ask you are you a human., there is no sense in this. 

 

 

 

 

On the contrary Doc, I know Muhammad was not the prophet.

 

trust me, you dont.

 

if he was not prophet then explain how could Muhammed tell us future stuff wich came true, he gave us Quran wich contains scientific and nummerical miracles wich cant be matched today?

 

how?

 

and tell me who is that person wich Jesus prophecied shall come after him

 

Jesus says:

 

 John 16:12-14 

"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear.

But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you.

 

who is this person , who fullfiled this prophecy?

 

 

Muhammed about future:

 

It is narrated by Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Umar that the Holy Prophet

(sallallahu

alayhi wa sallam) said:

 

When the

belly

of Makkah will be cleft open and through it will be dug out river-like

passages

(i.e. tunnels) and the buildings of

the Holy City of

Makkah will rise higher than its mountains, when you

observe these signs, then

understand that the time of trial(Judgment day) is

near at hand.”

 

 

When the belly

of Makkah

will be cleft open and through it will be dug out river-like passages

(i.e.

tunnels)

tunnel in mekka

72317635.jpg

 

 

 

in

19th century no tall building in Mekka

mecca-city-old-mecca-saudi-arabia+1152_1

 

 

and the buildings of the Holy City of

Makkah will rise

higher than its mountains,

 

how does it look now

makkah-city-clocktower1.jpg

MTT_2.jpg

 

in

arabic

 

"itha ra'aitun mecca bu'ijat katha'ima, wa ya-tasawa

bunyahnuha ru'usa jibaliha, faqad athalati sa'atu"

 

"itha ra'aitun

mecca bu'ijat katha'ima” “If you see mecca with holes in it’s mountains” -

refer to tunnels.

 

wa ya-tasawa bunyanuha ru'usa jibaliha” “And

when it’s buildings reach (or surpass) it’s mountain tops” - The clock tower,

and buildings in mecca now built.

 

faqad athalati sa'atu" “Then the hour has cast it’s shadow”

-

 

Hamza Yusuf - The Hour Has Cast its Shadow - Sign of the Hour

 

ساعة sa'at

The Hour/Clock

http://translate.google.se/#ar/en/%D...A7%D8%B9%D8%A9

 

How

could Muhammed know that 1400 years ago, that buildings will be

higher than

mountains?

 

God answers that in quran:

 

53:3 he(Muhammed) does

not speak from his own desire.

4 It is nothing but pure revelation revealed

by God.

 

Jesus

confirms this in Bible:

 

◄ John 16:13

But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide

you into all

the truth. He will not speak on his own;

he will speak

only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to

come.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

does not matter who said it, even if Muhammed himself said something illogical , like 1+1=5 we cant accept that, Religion of God must be logical and intlectually accepted otherwise what kind of relgion is that when 1+1+1=1 ??? we are not sheeps who accept religion blindly

 

 

 

 

no, that is not logical at all, beacuse Adam sin goes on all of us according to your if you see me doing something bad and you follow my steps of course you are responsible for that. even Islam says that if someone do something wrong and other follows him in that deed, the first man gets sins of others, sins are copied to him from them even though sins of wrongdoers are not descreased at all.

 

 

 

 

but your logic is very terrible, if pabtizing is key to salvation and paradise /kingdom of heaven then how could other people Before jesus and John the baptist go to paradise without baptism

 

 

you bible goes against you

 

 

Matthew 8:11

And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

 

cant you see that you allways go against logic and your holy book

 

how could Abraham, Isaac, Jacob go to paradise if they are not baptized???

 

 

 

 

no you did not, brethren are Isacc offsprings (jews) and Ishmaels offsprings (arabs) so if a prophet is jew or arab then prophescy is fullfiled.

 

 

Why would jews expect that prophet during time of Jesus and John? why would they ask for 3 person, Christ, Elijah and that prophet?

 

who fullfilled this prophecy then if not muhammed?

 

if you say Jesus fullfilled it, then why would they ask are you the Christ, he answers NO and then they asked are you that prophet, he answered No?

 

if Christ and that prophet are same then why would they repeat themselves, if he allready answered No when they asked about Christ.

 

Let me give you an example, if i ask you, are you a Man, you say yes, then i ask you ,are you a HUman?

 

is it logical that i repeat myself like this??? no, then it is not logical that they repeat themselves also.

 

 

 

 

the Christ is prophet , but That prophet means someone else not Christ. it is not logical to repeat themselves. just like i would not ask you if you are a man, you say no, and then i ask you are you a human., there is no sense in this.

 

 

 

 

trust me, you dont.

 

if he was not prophet then explain how could Muhammed tell us future stuff wich came true, he gave us Quran wich contains scientific and nummerical miracles wich cant be matched today?

 

how?

 

and tell me who is that person wich Jesus prophecied shall come after him

 

Jesus says:

 

John 16:12-14

"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear.

But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you.

 

who is this person , who fullfiled this prophecy?

 

 

Muhammed about future:

 

It is narrated by Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Umar that the Holy Prophet

(sallallahu

alayhi wa sallam) said:

 

When the

belly

of Makkah will be cleft open and through it will be dug out river-like

passages

(i.e. tunnels) and the buildings of

the Holy City of

Makkah will rise higher than its mountains, when you

observe these signs, then

understand that the time of trial(Judgment day) is

near at hand.”

 

 

When the belly

of Makkah

will be cleft open and through it will be dug out river-like passages

(i.e.

tunnels)

tunnel in mekka

72317635.jpg

 

 

 

in

19th century no tall building in Mekka

mecca-city-old-mecca-saudi-arabia+1152_1

 

 

and the buildings of the Holy City of

Makkah will rise

higher than its mountains,

 

how does it look now

makkah-city-clocktower1.jpg

MTT_2.jpg

 

in

arabic

 

"itha ra'aitun mecca bu'ijat katha'ima, wa ya-tasawa

bunyahnuha ru'usa jibaliha, faqad athalati sa'atu"

 

"itha ra'aitun

mecca bu'ijat katha'ima” “If you see mecca with holes in it’s mountains” -

refer to tunnels.

 

wa ya-tasawa bunyanuha ru'usa jibaliha” “And

when it’s buildings reach (or surpass) it’s mountain tops” - The clock tower,

and buildings in mecca now built.

 

faqad athalati sa'atu" “Then the hour has cast it’s shadow”

-

 

Hamza Yusuf - The Hour Has Cast its Shadow - Sign of the Hour

 

ساعة sa'at

The Hour/Clock

http://translate.google.se/#ar/en/%D...A7%D8%B9%D8%A9

 

How

could Muhammed know that 1400 years ago, that buildings will be

higher than

mountains?

 

God answers that in quran:

 

53:3 he(Muhammed) does

not speak from his own desire.

4 It is nothing but pure revelation revealed

by God.

 

Jesus

confirms this in Bible:

 

◄ John 16:13

But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide

you into all

the truth. He will not speak on his own;

he will speak

only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to

come.

 

Here is what I was going to reply. Any problems? 

 

 

 

First off I’m going to give the sheep some badly needed PR.  Sheep are actually pretty intelligent animals.

 

From an article on sheep intelligence.http://www.sheep101.info/stupidsheep.html

 

"A-mazing" sheep

According to researchers in Australia, sheep can learn and remember. Researchers have developed a complex maze test to measure intelligence and learning in sheep, similar to those used for rats and mice. Using the maze, researchers have concluded that sheep have excellent spatial memory and are able to learn and improve their performance. And they can retain this information for a six-week period. 

 

The maze uses the strong flocking instinct of sheep to motivate them to find their way through. The time it initially takes an animal to rejoin its flock indicates smartness, while subsequent improvement in times over consecutive days of testing measures learning and memory.

 

 But I don’t think sheep is what you wanted to discuss.

 

 

Second  the bible verse were not to prove it logically. This was to show that the apostles did teach it. Like you asked me to do.

 

For your comment on original sin here is an excerpt fromhttp://www.theologywebsite.com/etext/athanasius/ch1.shtml by St. Anathasius

 

This, then, was the plight of men. God had not only made them out of nothing, but had also graciously bestowed on them His own life by the grace of the Word. Then, turning from eternal things to things corruptible, by counsel of the devil, they had become the cause of their own corruption in death; for, as I said before, though they were by nature subject to corruption, the grace of their union with the Word made them capable of escaping from the natural law, provided that they retained the beauty of innocence with which they were created. That is to say, the presence of the Word with them shielded them even from natural corruption, as also Wisdom says:

 

"God created man for incorruption and as an image of His own eternity; but by envy of the devil death entered into the world."[10]

When this happened, men began to die, and corruption ran riot among them and held sway over them to an even more than natural degree, because it was the penalty of which God had forewarned them for transgressing the commandment. Indeed, they had in their sinning surpassed all limits; for, having invented wickedness in the beginning and so involved themselves in death and corruption, they had gone on gradually from bad to worse, not stopping at any one kind of evil, but continually, as with insatiable appetite, devising new kinds of sins. Adulteries and thefts were everywhere, murder and rapine filled the earth, law was disregarded in corruption and injustice, all kinds of iniquities were perpetrated by all, both singly and in common. Cities were warring with cities, nations were rising against nations, and the whole earth was rent with factions and battles, while each strove to outdo the other in wickedness. Even crimes contrary to nature were not unknown, but as the martyr-apostle of Christ says:

"Their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature; and the men also, leaving the natural use of the woman, flamed out in lust towards each other, perpetrating shameless acts with their own sex, and receiving in their own persons the due recompense of their pervertedness."[11]

 

Effectively Anathasius is saying that Adam’s sin led to death and corruption. This is not an attempt to explain the logic but to make sure we are on the same page. In other words Death, disordered passions, and inclination to sin come with original sin.

 

 

Now for the logic.  Since you and I agree that Adam did sin, God being just, would have punished him. This punishment was death. A side effect of Adams sin was corruption. This corruption continues on today. Baptism restores some of that original incorruption. That’s all that I can readily explain.  Like in my earlier example when I said that my innocence was lost through your sin, though I think my analogy was flawed. It's more like missing a certain chromosome and being unable to pass it on to children. If you search online a better example will be found 

 

As a person I quoted in an earlier post said, if there was no original sin, then there would be a small group of people who did not sin in their entire lives. Can you give me some examples?

 

On Baptism, they are saved for the same reason babies are saved. They couldn’t have chosen to be baptized so they are protected by their inability. They followed God’s law, obeyed his commands, and were faithful to him. So they were saved.

 

 

Okay in my above post on the use of brethren in Deuteronomy look at the one forbidding interest on Jews. Here are other verses on charging interest to Jews.

Exodus 22:24 (25) — If thou lend money to any of My people, even to the poor with thee, thou shalt not be to him as a creditor; neither shall ye lay upon him interest.

 

Leviticus 25:36 — Take thou no interest of him or increase; but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee.

 

Leviticus 25:37 — Thou shalt not give him thy money upon interest, nor give him thy victuals for increase.

 

Deuteronomy 23:20 (19) — Thou shalt not lend upon interest to thy brother: interest of money, interest of victuals, interest of any thing that is lent upon interest.

 

Deuteronomy 23:21 (20) — Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon interest; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon interest; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou puttest thy hand unto, in the land whither thou goest in to possess it.

 

Notice in the first on how Moses writes  MY PEOPLE. This shows that he specifically meant Jews when he talked on interest. Thus since in Deuteronomy it says my brethren when talking of interest and Moses said not to charge interest on his people, that brethren in Deuteronomy meant israelites and thus could not have been about Muhammad. 

 

For John 1:25, if as you say, Muhammad was mentioned by the Jews, why  didn't Christ prophesize a prophet? You gave an example but later I will show why it does not cut it. 

 

Also here is an analogy to your post on human, man or animal. ( given by a friend)

 

"...why do you pretend to enforce the law? you aren't the police, nor Elliott Ness, nor even a security guard..." 

 

The above question follows the pattern of John 1:25, as 'Messiah' and 'prophet' refer to quasi offices, while Elijah would be a famous prophet, as Elliot Ness was a famous police officer.

 

By this 'logic', it would be illogical to ask if he was also a security guard, because I already asked if he was a police officer (and E. Ness). But your logic is flawed, because the question was clearly rhetorical--inteneded to make a point; the repetition is for effect, to emphasize the same point. Not actually seeking information.

In other words the Pharisees weren't actually inquiring of John if he was the Messiah, or actually Elijah, or actually 'the Prophet'--just making the point of 'who do you think you are, going around baptizing people?

 

Another thing. Does that mean you accept chapter 1 of the book of John as truthful? If not explain why?

 

 

On your quotation from John. Funny that. Here is what Jesus says on the Spirit of Truth

 

John 14:15  “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.

John 14:16  And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, 

John 14:17  the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.

 

The world will not see the spirit of truth but Jesus' disciples will know it. That doesn't sound like Muhammad who was seen by many. Also how could Muhammad be in anybody? Please explain.

 

On your prophesy on Mecca. Interesting. But in the end it matters not. Muhammad still contradicts previous revelation.

As the bible says:

Galatians 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!

 

The apostles are saying if even they themselves or an angel preach counter to the gospel they are accursed. Muhammad preached counter to the Gospel. Thus I don't see his prophethood as valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As there are twelve pages I am not sure I know if the following is going along with what is presently being said:

 

Islam says that they believe that Jesus was the messiah.  No Christian is going to disagree with that statement.

 

However, Islam also says that Jesus was never crucified, died for anybody's sins, nor was God's son.  For the sake of argument, for now, let us leave the literal or not literal son thing be of its own.  Moving on to the rest of it, however, we have no choice but to look at the things that had to be fulfilled for an individual to be considered the messiah.

 

Isaiah 53 gives us plenty to work with. 

 

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2053&version=NIV

 

I have provided the above link for anyone wishing to look at the chapter in its entirety but for the sake of time I will be using more specific verses:

 

 

But he was pierced for our transgressions,
    he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him
    and by his wounds we are healed.

^ Isaiah 53:5

 

Not only does it talk of the suffering of the messiah and dying for us but Isaiah 53 gives scenes that are specific to the crucifixion story.

 

 

He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
    and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
    nor was any deceit in his mouth.

^Isaiah 53:9

 

In the crucifixion story Jesus was crucified next to two thieves.

 

One only need read the rest to see where it goes.

 

Naturally I could list more and yes these are according to the Bible.  If a person goes with the modern Jewish concept of messiah then the messiah will be a future king who will bring world peace and be a military leader.  Jesus, in the Islamic teaching,  was to be the final prophet for israel...not a literal son of God who was not a sacrifice for atonement but there is no denying that on Earth he was not a military leader or a worldly king.  Seeing as how Paul was a Jewish scholar of his time and Luke, the disciple of Jesus, was an educated  man as well we have to think that there must be something to the way that they viewed the ancient texts and its reading on who Jesus was supposed to be. 

 

Before we begin the circular argument of the Bible is corrupted are we going according to the modern Bible or are we referring to when it was first canonized in 325 AD?  My point simply is that the Islamic teaching of messiah does not seem to make sense to me based on any teaching but their own.  If we are to look back to the Old Testament we see a sharp contradiction, in my opinion, to the understanding of messiah given by Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As there are twelve pages I am not sure I know if the following is going along with what is presently being said:

 

Islam says that they believe that Jesus was the messiah. No Christian is going to disagree with that statement.

 

However, Islam also says that Jesus was never crucified, died for anybody's sins, nor was God's son. For the sake of argument, for now, let us leave the literal or not literal son thing be of its own. Moving on to the rest of it, however, we have no choice but to look at the things that had to be fulfilled for an individual to be considered the messiah.

 

Isaiah 53 gives us plenty to work with.

 

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2053&version=NIV

 

I have provided the above link for anyone wishing to look at the chapter in its entirety but for the sake of time I will be using more specific verses:

 

^ Isaiah 53:5

 

Not only does it talk of the suffering of the messiah and dying for us but Isaiah 53 gives scenes that are specific to the crucifixion story.

 

^Isaiah 53:9

 

In the crucifixion story Jesus was crucified next to two thieves.

 

One only need read the rest to see where it goes.

 

Naturally I could list more and yes these are according to the Bible. If a person goes with the modern Jewish concept of messiah then the messiah will be a future king who will bring world peace and be a military leader. Jesus, in the Islamic teaching, was to be the final prophet for israel...not a literal son of God who was not a sacrifice for atonement but there is no denying that on Earth he was not a military leader or a worldly king. Seeing as how Paul was a Jewish scholar of his time and Luke, the disciple of Jesus, was an educated man as well we have to think that there must be something to the way that they viewed the ancient texts and its reading on who Jesus was supposed to be.

 

Before we begin the circular argument of the Bible is corrupted are we going according to the modern Bible or are we referring to when it was first canonized in 325 AD? My point simply is that the Islamic teaching of messiah does not seem to make sense to me based on any teaching but their own. If we are to look back to the Old Testament we see a sharp contradiction, in my opinion, to the understanding of messiah given by Islam.

That is more or less in line with what we were discussing. And if it isn't, :) it is a debate thread. I'm sure we can accommodate you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Effectively Anathasius is saying that Adam’s sin led to death and corruption. This is not an attempt to explain the logic but to make sure we are on the same page. In other words Death, disordered passions, and inclination to sin come with original sin.

 

 

i dont care what atnathasious said, my question is how can you  believe such nonsence that someone else is responsible for your sins??? how how how?

 

that is the difference between us muslims and christians, we do question everything, we cant accept unlogical stuff. while you christians accept everythhing they tell.

 

 

 

The world will not see the spirit of truth but Jesus' disciples will know it. That doesn't sound like Muhammad who was seen by many. Also how could Muhammad be in anybody? Please explain.

 

 

 

yes, exactly disciples of jesus will know Muhammed but other will not, beacuse jesus talked about Muhammed so they knew him very well while other people did not hear about Muhamemd so they could not recognize him, but followers of Jesus teachings will recognize Muhammed beacuse jesus talked about him, that is what it means.

 

 

 

Muhammad still contradicts previous revelation.

As the bible says:

Galatians 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!

 

 

 

abosolutly not, Muhamemd never preached anything different that Jesus, Moses, and other prophets, they all had same message, but it is you christians who follow man-made religion christianity wich was created by paul, not jesus.

 

look this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont care what atnathasious said, my question is how can you  believe such nonsence that someone else is responsible for your sins??? how how how?

 

that is the difference between us muslims and christians, we do question everything, we cant accept unlogical stuff. while you christians accept everythhing they tell.

 

 

 

yes, exactly disciples of jesus will know Muhammed but other will not, beacuse jesus talked about Muhammed so they knew him very well while other people did not hear about Muhamemd so they could not recognize him, but followers of Jesus teachings will recognize Muhammed beacuse jesus talked about him, that is what it means.

 

 

 

abosolutly not, Muhamemd never preached anything different that Jesus, Moses, and other prophets, they all had same message, but it is you christians who follow man-made religion christianity wich was created by paul, not jesus.

 

look this

Ok first of all Anathasius quote was to make sure you understood original sin. It is not so much a sin like me kicking a puppy but is more like in my earlier example, how your sin destroyed my innocence. Again if any Christians think that I am misrepresenting the doctrine please say so. 

Also you ignored my paragraph after the Anathasius quote. In it I ask, since I believe original sin to lead to death, disordered passions and corruption; if you would please point out someone who was not corrupted in any way. From what I know of the world, there is no one, proving that something, like original sin, caused all men to be corrupted. 

 

Also if I were you I would care what Athanasius taught. He refuted a heresy, Arianism, very similiar to Muhammad's teachings. If you want to read more here is an article.

http://www.fortifyingthefamily.com/arianism.html

 

You still have not shown how Muhammad is in anybody. Also how will Muhammad, who died, remain with us. 

 

John 14:17  the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.

 

In addition the world very much knows Muhammad, as after all he wrote a book on all his teachings. 

 

You also have not answered my points on how in Deuteronomy, where brethren means Jews for interest and so brethren must mean Jews in the case of the prophet?  

 

Actually, going from the bible, Muhammad contradicted Jesus often. 

 

Here is Jesus 

 

John 10:38  but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize [and understand] that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”

 

John 20:28  Thomas answered and said to him, “My Lord and my God!”

John 20:29  Jesus said to him, “Have you come to believe because you have seen me?r Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed.”

 

Matthew 16:16  Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Matthew 16:17  Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.

 

Here Jesus shows his divinity.  Thus does Muhammad contradict Jesus. 

 

Finally for some reason I can't watch videos from this site on my computer. If I get the chance I will watch your video and point out any errors or problems I see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I applaud what you are trying to show, truly, and it is a valiant effort.  But, new testament is irrelevant to Islam because they view it as corrupted and unreliable.  The key is in the messianic qualifications that were listed before hand.....

 

what did the old teachings believe?  what was the oral tradition?

 

Also it might be interesting to note that the Qur'an was not put together during the life of Muhammad.  I personally believe that the history of the written Qur'an is a bit sketchy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we continue here

 

What is curious is that anywhere I go Muslims do not want to talk about the prophecies that had to be fulfilled in order for one to be considered messiah, part of which includes the need for the suffering messiah who will die for atonement known as messiah ben joseph yet if true it disproves Islam.  .......


 


just a thought to think upon.


dont worry i will reply to that


first, you have to prove that Bible is unchanged book of God, then when you prove that we can take that as evidence for your claims.


Bible dont even claim it is book of God, it claim it is mix of everything, word of God, word of prophets, word of historians, and pronography.

 

let see what bible say about itself


Luke1:-3


Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us,

just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.

With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus

 

so Luke is saying, this bible is written from the stories of people. and we all know that people can make errors in their stories.

logically, if book is ispired by God there is no place for errors since God is all aware of future stuff and reality

 

How many Horsemen did David Capture, 1700 or 7000?

 

1,700 Horsemen (2 Samuel 8:4) - "And David captured from him 1,700 horsemen and 20,000 foot soldiers; and David hamstrung the chariot horses, but reserved enough of them for 100 chariots

vs.

7,000 Horsemen (1 Chronicles 18:4) - "And David took from him 1,000 chariots and 7,000 horsemen and 20,000 foot soldiers, and David hamstrung all the chariot horses, but reserved enough of them for 100 chariots."

 

you see such errors cant be from a book of God, God does not allow such errors in his book, what God is that make such errors?? 

So conclusion is, that bible is changed troughout history by people.

 

God confirms that in the Quran that people changed bible:

 

2:79 So woe to those who write something down with their own hands and then claim, ‘This is from God,’ in order to make some small gain. Woe to them for what their hands have written! Woe to them for all that they have earned!

 

5:13 But because of them breaking their covenant, We have cursed them, and made their hearts become hardened; they distort the words of the Scripture out of context, and have forgotten some of what they were warned against.

 

so God says in the Quran that people changed bible, distorted words in it. And then we read bible and see contradictions, one verse say 1700 other say 7000 horsemen. and there is a lot os such contradictions, so how can you trust such book???


 

Bible even confirms this

 

 Jeremiah 8:8 

"'How can you say, "We are wise because we have the word of the LORD," when your teachers have twisted it by writing lies?


So now questions is what prophecies about jesus death on the cross?

 

lets have a look on that

 

 


about the prophecies that had to be fulfilled in order for one to be considered messiah, part of which includes the need for the suffering messiah who will die for atonement known as messiah ben joseph yet if true it disproves Islam.  .......


so you are saying that Messiah need to die for our sins, let see what bible and logic say about that


Bible says:

 Deuteronomy 24:16 

Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.

 

this is logical and just, beacuse everyone shall be responsible for his own sins, why should jesus be punished for your and mine sins??? there is no sence in that.

 

What if i rob a bank, and we put you in jail for that? is it ok for you??? NO, so why is it ok that we shall put sinless jesus for your sins???

so logically there is no sence in christian belioef system about jesus diyng for their sins on the cross.


listen to this short answer


why do you put Isaiah as evidence for anything,

 

Unbelievable what you can find in bible
God" of the "bible" is a barber...FUNNY Ahmed Deedat


 

Isaiah 7:20 In that day the Lord will use a razor hired from beyond the River--the king of Assyria--to shave your head and the hair of your legs, and to take off your beards also.

 

how would you feel if i said to you, "can you please shave my legs"

 

And you put Isaiah as evidence for something while he make God ridicolous

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok first of all Anathasius quote was to make sure you understood original sin. It is not so much a sin like me kicking a puppy but is more like in my earlier example, how your sin destroyed my innocence. Again if any Christians think that I am misrepresenting the doctrine please say so. 

Also you ignored my paragraph after the Anathasius quote. In it I ask, since I believe original sin to lead to death, disordered passions and corruption; if you would please point out someone who was not corrupted in any way. From what I know of the world, there is no one, proving that something, like original sin, caused all men to be corrupted. 

 

Also if I were you I would care what Athanasius taught. He refuted a heresy, Arianism, very similiar to Muhammad's teachings. If you want to read more here is an article.

http://www.fortifyingthefamily.com/arianism.html

 

You still have not shown how Muhammad is in anybody. Also how will Muhammad, who died, remain with us. 

 

John 14:17  the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.

 

In addition the world very much knows Muhammad, as after all he wrote a book on all his teachings. 

 

You also have not answered my points on how in Deuteronomy, where brethren means Jews for interest and so brethren must mean Jews in the case of the prophet?  

 

Actually, going from the bible, Muhammad contradicted Jesus often. 

 

Here is Jesus 

 

John 10:38  but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize [and understand] that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”

 

John 20:28  Thomas answered and said to him, “My Lord and my God!”

John 20:29  Jesus said to him, “Have you come to believe because you have seen me?r Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed.”

 

Matthew 16:16  Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Matthew 16:17  Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.

 

Here Jesus shows his divinity.  Thus does Muhammad contradict Jesus. 

 

Finally for some reason I can't watch videos from this site on my computer. If I get the chance I will watch your video and point out any errors or problems I see. 

 

 

 

Ok first of all Anathasius quote was to make sure you understood original sin. It is not so much a sin like me kicking a puppy but is more like in my earlier example, how your sin destroyed my innocence. Again if any Christians think that I am misrepresenting the doctrine please say so. 

Also you ignored my paragraph after the Anathasius quote. In it I ask, since I believe original sin to lead to death, disordered passions and corruption; if you would please point out someone who was not corrupted in any way. From what I know of the world, there is no one, proving that something, like original sin, caused all men to be corrupted.

 

 

son, your bible goes against your illogical belief system 

 

Bible says:

 Deuteronomy 24:16 

Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.

 

nobody shall die for you, if you sins, your will be puinished by God for that or be forgiven by God's mercy, there is no need that anyone die for you or me. God punish or forgive , there is no other alternative.

 

 

 

 

You still have not shown how Muhammad is in anybody. Also how will Muhammad, who died, remain with us. 

 

 

 

Muhamemd remain with us with his teachings, God brought Quran via Muhamemd, and Muhammed hadith remain among us until the day of Judgtment, that is why he remain with us. You dont need to remain physically with us, you can stay with us with your teachings wich people follow in details.

 

How can Muhammed be in us, of course he can be in us with his teachings, we muslims learn by heart whole Quran, and even his sayings, so Muhammed is in our minds every day, beacuse we pray 5 times a day.

 

 

 

In addition the world very much knows Muhammad, as after all he wrote a book on all his teachings. 

 

 

Muhammed did not wrote anything, it is well known fact that he could not write and read, he was illitarate, even bible confirms his illiteracy.

 

God says in the quran that Muhammed is illitarate

 

7:158 ...There is no God but Him; He gives life and death, so believe in God and His Messenger(Muhammed), the unlettered prophet who believes in God and His words, and follow him so that you may find guidance.’

 

bible confirms this

Isaiah 29:12

And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.

 

look what Muhammed said when he met angel Gabriel bring first verses of the book called Quran

 

One of Muhammad's wives (Aisha bint Abu Bakr) later gave the following narration of the event

 

Forerunners of the Revelation assumed the form of true visions that would strikingly come true all the time. After that, solitude became dear to him and he would go to the cave, Hira, to engage in devotion there for a certain number of nights before returning to his family, and then he would return for provisions for a similar stay. Unexpectedly, the angel Gabriel came to Muhammad and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, "I do not know how to read". The Prophet added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, "I do not know how to read." Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, "I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here is Jesus 

 

John 10:38  but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize [and understand] that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”

 

 

 

 

So this is evidence for divinity??? son you have missunderstood bible completely, i dont know what they teach you in the church , but i will explain to you these texts and this has nothing to do with divinity.

 

actually it was not Jesus who preformed miracles, it was God

 

evidence:

 

 Acts 2:22 

New International Version (©2011)

"Fellow israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.

 

not jesus as you see

 

but what does this words mean

 

the Father is in me and I am in the Father

 

let have a look what jesus about these words 

 

Also let us look at verse John 17:20-22 "That the ALL may be made ONE. Like thou Father art in me, I in thee, that they may be ONE in us. I in

them, they in me, that they may be perfect in ONE".  In this verse, the same word ONE used, the Greek, HEN is used, not only to describe Jesus and the Father but to describe Jesus, the Father and eleven of the twelve disciples of Jesus. So here if that implies equality, we have a unique case of 13 Gods.

 

Question: In John 10:30 Jesus says, "I and the Father are one [hen]." Doesn't this show that they are one in essence?

 

This statement does not suggest either a dual or triune deity. What John's Jesus meant by the word hen ("one") becomes clear from his prayer concerning the apostles: "That they may be one [hen], just as we are one [hen]" (John 17:22), which means that they should be united in agreement with one another as he (Jesus) is always united in agreement with God, as stated: "I [Jesus] always do the things that are pleasing to Him [God]" (John 8:29).

There is thus no implication that Jesus and God, or the twelve apostles are to be considered as of one essence.

 

as you can see you have missunderstood completly what jesus meant by

the Father is in me and I am in the Father

 

 

 

John 20:28  Thomas answered and said to him, “My Lord and my God!”

John 20:29  Jesus said to him, “Have you come to believe because you have seen me?r Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed.”

 

 

 

 

  26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27Then he (Jesus) said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

 

Thomas doubted that Jesus (pbuh) was alive, so Jesus (pbuh) shows him his hands and asks him to put his hand into his (Jesus’s) side and stop doubting and believe that he is still Alive. This was surprising to Thomas, So Thomas exclaimed.

 

28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

 

This was a mere exclamation by Thomas. In day-to-day life, we utter things like “Oh My God! What have I done?” “Oh My God ! Its so late”  Does it mean I am calling my hearer a God?

 

29Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

 

Believed what? Believed that he is God? No !! Believe that Jesus (pbuh) is still alive and NOT dead. Din’t Thomas see Jesus (pbuh) before the alleged “crucifixion”? Of course he did ! If Jesus meant, that you have believe that I am God, so why is Jesus saying that you have seen me and believe? He had already seen him before.

 

This explanation is sufficient to Prove that Jesus (pbuh) did not claim divinity. It was only an exclamation by Thomas.

 

 

 

 

Matthew 16:16  Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Matthew 16:17  Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.

 

 

 

according to bible, Adam, david, jacob are sons of God, so what is special with jesus, biblically son of God is righteous person, not physically son of God.

 

 

 

Here Jesus shows his divinity.  Thus does Muhammad contradict Jesus. 

 

Finally for some reason I can't watch videos from this site on my computer. If I get the chance I will watch your video and point out any errors or problems I see. 

 

no he did not show any divinity, but i saw you missrepresenting or missunderstanding what he really said and meant.

 

 

God said in bible

 

Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man

 

Bible

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

 

Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man

 

if God is not a man, and jesus is man, then jesus is not God, simple fact

 

 

Bible

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God

 

but people have seen Jesus, that is why jesus is not God.

 

 

If jesus was God, what kind of God is this

 

God that does nor know stuff?

 

Mark 13:32 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

 

What kind of God is this who can't do anything?

 

John 5:30 By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me.

 

Jesus was a man acredited by God, not that he is God?

 

Acts 2:22 "Men of israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.

 

if jesus was God, what kind of God is jesus when he need to be acredited by another God

 

Jesus God have another God???? 2 Gods?

 

John 20:17 Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"

 

and jesus himself said this

 

Mark 12:29 Jesus replied, "The most important commandment is this: 'Listen, O israel! The LORD our God is the one and only LORD.

 

 

What kind of God prays to another God?

 

Matthew 26:39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed

 

this is evidence from your own bible that jesus was not God

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×