BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
 
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      09-12-2007, 05:49 AM   #177
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

its ray den

Also, like you said about the video on Youtube that you could criticise, well, I actually just watched the video with Ergun Caner and I can tell you that he has a totally wrong perception of Islam and why Allah requires things from us. I could reply to what he has said in the video, but we are getting off topic. The topic is "Did Jesus (AS) die for the sins of the world?". What FloridaBoy is doing is stupid as I addressed above...
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-21-2007, 07:12 AM   #178
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

FloridaBoy

It's interesting to see that you again havent even acknowledged the points and information I put across to you. Who knows, maybe you've learned that for dialogue you actually have to absorb what others say and stay on topic.

its ray den

hey bro. was just wondering if you have seen my last posts for you?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-22-2007, 11:38 AM   #179
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Respectfully, I leave post #176 open for everyone to reply to. I really am interested in knowing your responses to each point I made. I feel that in such a deep dialogue we should take time to analyse eachother's ideas point by point.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-24-2007, 08:49 AM   #180
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
2
Rep
207
Posts

 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

iTrader: (0)

a lot of your assertions can be rebutted when you read the pages on www.carm.org. there are even rebuttals to things that you have not even brought up yet. i suggest you read some of them and since it's pretty well organized, you can find what you're looking for. aside from the stuff on that site, i've got nothing else.

but i do want to go back to the original question of "Did Jesus die for the sins of the world?" and the next obvious question is "why?".

i've been praying for a way to reach you and make you understand the answer to this question.

here are some questions for you to think about, and answer to me if you can.
  • to you, what is holiness? using your definition, answer the following questions...
  • do you believe God is Holy? explain.
  • do you believe you are holy, or can you become holy? if yes, how and why.
  • do you believe holiness and unholiness can be together? why?
Appreciate 0
      09-25-2007, 10:07 AM   #181
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
a lot of your assertions can be rebutted when you read the pages on www.carm.org. there are even rebuttals to things that you have not even brought up yet. i suggest you read some of them and since it's pretty well organized, you can find what you're looking for. aside from the stuff on that site, i've got nothing else.
Thanks for your reply bro. Firstly, I'm actually suprised that you put down my points as mere assertions. Everything I said I supported from the Bible. You believe it to be the word of God, therefore this should help you understand the facts.

Regarding John 10, let's think logically. Let's pretend we both believe the Bible is not corrupted and IS the word of God. Look at the facts that BOTH of us can agree on:

* We cannot always take the Gospels language as literal. When God speak of his hand, he doesnt really have a human hand.
* When Jesus (AS) speaks about seeing the Father, he doesnt mean literally seeing the Father with your eyes.
* When Jesus (AS)spoke about being within people, he didnt mean physically.
* When he spoke about the Apostles being within him, he didnt mean physically.
* When he spoke about many people being one, he didnt mean literally "one being".


There are simple basic points that we can both agree on. Therefore, it brings the question to my mind, how can we take John 10:30 as literal? How can we be 100% certain that Jesus means he and the Father are one being? If you want to take it as literal then I guess you would have to accept that Jesus, the Father and the 12 Disciples are part of the same being. This would totally rule out the trinity and we would need another word to convey God in 14 parts

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
but i do want to go back to the original question of "Did Jesus die for the sins of the world?" and the next obvious question is "why?".
Me too. However, I feel that to do that we must address the question "can we trust the Bible?" I must ask you, what Bible do you read? There are so many versions of it and those versions have revisions etc. Also, some Christians accept 73 books and some accept 66 books.

Also, what is your thoughts about verses that have been thrown out the Bible? There is a huge lists of things that have been thrown out so how can we claim to have the word of God in our hands? Perhaps some people think that we have removed all of the errors from the Bible but how can we be so sure? I'm sure if the manuscripts werent written on perishable material we would be able to find earlier ones that predate what we have. I also want you to answer this for me:

How many more changes do you think would need to be made to the Bible if we found earlier manuscripts that predate what we have? it is very important, especially when people quote verses from the Bible that have been removed from the Bible!

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
to you, what is holiness? using your definition, answer the following questions...
do you believe God is Holy? explain.
do you believe you are holy, or can you become holy? if yes, how and why.
do you believe holiness and unholiness can be together? why?
To help you understand my personal perspective, I will try explain all of this together. Firstly, we believe that Allah is infinite. We also believe he is just and fair in everything he does. We also believe that he knoweth what we dont know. Also, of course God is Holy but he is much more than that. He is infinite and has knowledge that others dont have.

Jesus (AS) even testifies to this:

""But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone." Mark (13:32)

Now, moving downwards so to speak, Allah has Angels, Books & Messengers. But let's deal with messengers since Angels are not human and have no free-will and hence cannot disobey Allah. We believe that Messengers and Prophets of Allah to be Holy in that they are good examples for us to follow. Allah has sent them to us for our own gain.

The Bible says that Jesus (AS) is the "way", the "truth" & the "light". Firstly, we know it's not literal. How can someone be "light"? Obviously these adjectives are used to describe Jesus (AS)as a rightous person. The Holy Prophet (SAW) is described in the Quran as a "mercy for mankind". This does not mean that he is some saviour to die for us or is divine. It simply means that he was sent by God, just like Jesus (AS). Infact Jesus (AS) even testifies that he was SENT by Allah:

"I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just: because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." John (5:30)

The Quran also testifies that the Holy Prophet (SAW) acts upon what Allah commands him to do:

"Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him"
Quran (53:3-4)


Now, on our level, here's what I personally think. (May Allah forgive me and guide me if my beliefs are wrong). I think that rightous people will earn reward with Allah, and evil doers will earn punishment for their deeds. It's really that simple. The Bible also teaches so, I think you should read Ezekiel 18.

Let's consider verses 17-21:

He will not die for his father's sin; he will surely live. But his father will die for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people.

"Yet you ask, 'Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?' Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.

"But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die.


Now look, I am finding my own beliefs in the Bible! The Bible here is clearly teaching that each soul shall earn it's own reward/punishment. The Bible also teaches that noone will bear the burden of their son or father. AND most importantly, the Bible is telling us that we can turn from sin and Allah will be pleased with us. "He will surely live, he will not die".

Jesus (AS) also conveys the same message through his parables in the Bible. Recall the parable of the rich man with two sons. One son left his father but then realised his father had servants who were in a better position and were not looking after pigs. So he goes back to his father and there is a great feast. His older, loyal brother questions his father about this and his father says that he is very happy that his lost son is now found. Look at the eloquence and beauty of this friend. I am finding my own beliefs in the Bible.

Also recall that Jesus (AS) said that those who keep the commandments and teach others to do so will be called the GREATEST in the Heaven. I share this belief too. To conclude, I feel that there are many levels of holiness. I feel that noone can share God's level of holiness simply because he is infinite and has NO shortcomings. The Prophets and Messengers (pbuh) are also holy in a sense, but they are finite and are human just like us. They eat, sleep, walk & talk. Then on our level, we too can obtain holiness by following God's plan for us. It's really that simple. If you are rightous and follow Allah's commandments, you will earn reward; if you commit evil deeds you will earn punishment.

I hope you can understand what I have put across to you. I look forward to your response to my points and to my questions.
__________________

Last edited by hks786; 09-26-2007 at 07:33 AM.
Appreciate 0
      09-25-2007, 03:41 PM   #182
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
2
Rep
207
Posts

 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

iTrader: (0)

i knew you'd try to sucker me back into this debate about the validity of the bible. i don't really want to get into it because the site i referred you to can answer all of your questions. ALL. just read it will you? please? i beg of you. it's just as good as if i answered you myself, except that site is organized better and has better explanations. so in reality, for you to read that site is better than you prodding me for answers. read it.

as odd as this is for me to do on a car forum, i'm going to pray for you.

Heavenly Father, i praise you Lord for your sovereignty over all your creation. God I pray for HKS now, that you may bless Him with sight and reveal to him the truth in your Word. send down your Spirit to guide him in his search for you Lord. in Jesus' name i pray, amen.

i will respond to the rest of your post later.
Appreciate 0
      09-25-2007, 05:44 PM   #183
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
i knew you'd try to sucker me back into this debate about the validity of the bible. i don't really want to get into it because the site i referred you to can answer all of your questions. ALL. just read it will you? please? i beg of you. it's just as good as if i answered you myself, except that site is organized better and has better explanations. so in reality, for you to read that site is better than you prodding me for answers. read it.
I'm quite suprised that you think I'm "suckering" you into it. It's a valid question. Let's consider this. In one hand I'm holding the KJV, and in my other I'm holding the RSV. Now, 50 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations have thrown some KJV verses out and compiled the RSV. You cant say that both the RSV and the KJV are the word of God. They dont contain the same verses...

May I respectfully ask which Bible you believe to be the word of God?

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
Heavenly Father, i praise you Lord for your sovereignty over all your creation. God I pray for HKS now, that you may bless Him with sight and reveal to him the truth in your Word. send down your Spirit to guide him in his search for you Lord. in Jesus' name i pray, amen.
Thanks for your prayer. I see nothing strange about it. I try to pray 5 times a day that Allah will guide all so that we can earn his reward and pleasure

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
i will respond to the rest of your post later.
I look forward to it.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 12:06 AM   #184
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
2
Rep
207
Posts

 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
I'm quite suprised that you think I'm "suckering" you into it. It's a valid question. Let's consider this. In one hand I'm holding the KJV, and in my other I'm holding the RSV. Now, 50 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations have thrown some KJV verses out and compiled the RSV. You cant say that both the RSV and the KJV are the word of God. They dont contain the same verses...

May I respectfully ask which Bible you believe to be the word of God?
i'm not saying your questions aren't valid. i'm just saying that time and time again, i've referred you to www.carm.org to find your answers yet you continue to ask me the same things. why do you do that? i simply do not have the time, energy or knowledge to answer every one of your questions completely.

secondly, what we refer to as the inerrant Word of God is the original text. i do not consider our current translations and versions completely inerrant and free from translational issues and issues with reinterpretation.

however, this does not mean that our current translations and versions are unreliable. read carm.org for more...

btw i use NIV, KJV, NKJV, NLT, and the amplified bible. i believe some translations give and take on the true intention of scripture in order to make it easier to read and understand. it's a trade off and i feel that reading multiple versions is good to better understand the true meaning of a passage.
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 12:46 AM   #185
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
i'm not saying your questions aren't valid. i'm just saying that time and time again, i've referred you to www.carm.org to find your answers yet you continue to ask me the same things. why do you do that? i simply do not have the time, energy or knowledge to answer every one of your questions completely.
The reason I decided to ask on the forum is that reading websites is not the same as dialogues. Websites are there to be read, if after that you dont understand it or cannot agree with it, you cant engage in dialogue. Also, some websites (from ALL faiths) are very - how can I say - snobbish. I have found that most people on this forum are actually very decent and I thought they would be kind enough to engage in dialogue

Also, recall that my case never rested on the validity of the Bible. However, you must see that as long as we call something the word of God, we can claim anything. For example, if I say hindi scripture is the word of God I can say that God is an elephant. No disrespect to hindus...

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
btw i use NIV, KJV, NKJV, NLT, and the amplified bible. i believe some translations give and take on the true intention of scripture in order to make it easier to read and understand. it's a trade off and i feel that reading multiple versions is good to better understand the true meaning of a passage.
Thanks for that. I find it interesting that you read the KJV and NKJV. Clearly they are different, how can they both be the word of God? Also, the original KJV was "authorised by King James" not God Almighty. Secondly, how can we call anything the "NKJV"? The fact is that even that wasnt authorised by King James. If he was here today he might not accept it as the word of God.

Moreover, the NIV and KJV are very different. Many verses that the KJV have are thrown out of the Bible and are not considered as the word of God according to the NIV. Here's a list of some:

Mark (1:1): NIV Bible tells us in footnote that title “Son of God” was inserted later.
Acts: (8:37): NIV Bible removed the words again because “Son of God” was inserted later.
1 John (5:7,8): Only verse in whole of Bible that deals with the trinity. It has been removed because it is later insertion.
I Timothy (3:16): used to say “God” but we now know it is a forgery and has been corrected back to “he”
John (7:53-8:11): again, later additions.
Mark (16:9-20): The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have these verses.

How can you accept both the NIV and RSV as the word of God? Also, can I ask why you dont accept the RSV as the word of God? It claims to go to the MOST ancient manuscripts...Oh yeah before I forget, please also answer the following question as I asked before:

"If we found earlier manuscripts that predate what we already have, how many more changes would need to be made to the Bible?"

Recognised Bible scholar, Bruce Metzger also points this out. Also beware that some verses that the website quotes have been thrown out of the Bible because we have discovered that they are fabrications. This isnt so hard to believe because we have the manuscript evidence to prove it and we also have complaints about Gospels being manipulated as early as the 1st century as I have pointed out before.

I also look forward to your reply about John 10:30, in my last post I based my points ENTIRELY on points that we BOTH agree. Clearly this is common ground for us. I didnt even question the validity of the Bible but rather I "accepted" it as the word of God. Also, I look forward to your reply about "holiness".

Regards
__________________

Last edited by hks786; 09-26-2007 at 07:08 AM.
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 09:27 AM   #186
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
2
Rep
207
Posts

 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Thanks for that. I find it interesting that you read the KJV and NKJV. Clearly they are different, how can they both be the word of God? Also, the original KJV was "authorised by King James" not God Almighty.
you skipped this paragraph while you were reading didn't you?

secondly, what we refer to as the inerrant Word of God is the original text. i do not consider our current translations and versions completely inerrant and free from translational issues and issues with reinterpretation.

however, this does not mean that our current translations and versions are unreliable. read carm.org for more...


Quote:
Secondly, how can we call anything the "NKJV"? The fact is that even that wasnt authorised by King James.
this isn't even worth discussing. seriously? you have a problem with how the KJV is named? no one really cares about this tidbit and i think you shouldn't either.

Quote:
"If we found earlier manuscripts that predate what we already have, how many more changes would need to be made to the Bible?"
i'll answer this one: as many as it takes to get this right. you make it seem like the errors in the translated bible were put in there with malicious intent or to sensationalize the account beyond it's truth. if there are corrections to the bible then GREAT! but show me something that actually proves that the bible and the accounts of Jesus is a complete fabrication.

the fact is you have none. none of the errors show that Jesus work in ministry was sensationalized into miracles. none of the errors show that Jesus did not really die on the cross and did not come back to life on the third day. all you are doing is nitpicking at the small things.

Quote:
How can you accept both the NIV and RSV as the word of God? Also, can I ask why you dont accept the RSV as the word of God? It claims to go to the MOST ancient manuscripts
i'll reiterate: secondly, what we refer to as the inerrant Word of God is the original text. i do not consider our current translations and versions completely inerrant and free from translational issues and issues with reinterpretation.

however, this does not mean that our current translations and versions are unreliable. read carm.org for more...


lol. just because i don't read it doesn't mean it's not a good bible to rely on. but i've never heard of the RSV. the way i determine whether a particular translation is good or not is whether certain verses hold true to doctrine. there are some passages in specific versions that convey the wrong idea, or is not clear about the idea and this is what i consider wrong. there are certain translations that i never touch because i feel it is too watered out in order to make it easier to read.

Quote:
I also look forward to your reply about John 10:30, in my last post I based my points ENTIRELY on points that we BOTH agree. Clearly this is common ground for us. I didnt even question the validity of the Bible but rather I "accepted" it as the word of God.
you might be right with your conclusion, but john 10 is not the only place we can derive a triune God from. again, carm.org has that information in a nicely organized table for you.

i don't know about your beliefs on this, but there are things beyond this physical world that is in action. the spiritual realm is real. and spiritually, Christ is in me. spiritually, i am one with my brothers and sisters. spiritually i can see the Father and i interact with Him daily. so spiritually, the verses are very literal.

Quote:
Also, I look forward to your reply about "holiness".
here is what we believe. let me first define holiness. it is everything that makes God who he is. your definition isn't wrong, but it's very shallow. what makes God holy? it's his love, righteousness, mercy, justice, grace, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience. nothing can be more than holy because holiness is perfection. if you were to strive for the highest, it is holiness you strive for.

God is the only person complete in holiness. do i believe people are holy? yes, and i agree with you that it is a different level of holiness. human holiness. the holiness of man will never ever be on the same level as the holiness of God. i don't care if you're mother theresa, you will have sinned in some way, shape, or form and the fact that you have one speckle of sin, however small, makes you unholy in the eyes of God.

therefore, everyone is unholy and unfit to dwell in the presence of God. take an example from the old time Jews. once a year, a high priest would enter the most holy of holies, the part of the temple that is said to be the dwelling place of God. they would choose the holiest of the priest to enter, but before he entered, they would tie a rope with a bell on it to his feet because they had such fear that to be in the presence of God, they would be struck dead because of they were dirty compared to the holiness of God.

we also believe that there is nothing we can do on our own to become holy enough to have a proper relationship with God. this is what breaks God's heart. this is why Jesus had to come down to save us. He loved us so much that He sent His only son to take the punishment we so rightly deserve so that our relationship with God can be restored to it's rightful state, as it was between adam and eve before the original sin. Jesus died so that we may live.

i know you believe that if God wanted to do anything then he could do it. i would agree with you, unless it went against another aspect of His holy character. JUSTICE. i tried to explain this to you in my first post and i'll try to do it again. justice is getting what we deserve. i hope you believe that you deserve punishment for your sins. i hope you believe that if God was not a God of mercy, you and i would be dead right now. the only reason we are still live right now is simple because God is withholding his wrath until the day Christ returns.

but also, God is a forgiving God and He loves His creation. He wants you to be alive, to have an intimate relationship with Him. not just a relationship where you know of God, but He wants you to enjoy the blessings of truly knowing Him. but how can God reconcile these 2 seemingly opposite desires? through the shed blood Jesus Christ. the punishment that we deserve was satisfied when Jesus hung upon that cross and died. yes. he had to die in order for us to be restored back to the family of God. through the shedding of the pure and holy blood, we are cleansed and made holy. this is the only way we can become holy. it has nothing to do with what we have done or wha

this is the only way to be with God. it's not about being a martyr, it's not about doing nice things, helping people and leading a humble life (although these are honorable things). it's all about Jesus and what He did for us.

here are some reasons people typically can't believe in Christianity. they have too much pride to believe that they can't save themselves. they, being better than most people, are good enough to be with a holy God.

which one are you? do you believe you are righteous enough to be rewarded with being in the presence of Holiness?
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 10:38 AM   #187
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
50
Rep
2,376
Posts

 
Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

I can't quote the verse, but I see it often in evangelistic writings. It's a problem with translation and is teh other side of grey. In English, "Beleive ON the word of God" makes no sense, but the evangelical are so adamant about their preaching the word of God and not their own, they won't change the biblical reference to be proper English (IMHO). It's a simple change, but should be written "Beleive IN the word of God"

I suspect there is that similar type of translation "issue" when converting ANY religious writing into another language. Allah's target was Muhamed, so he "spoke" to him in his native tongue. Although all are his creation, some had a bit of advantage in that they could more readily understand teh native tongue. Just like the Jews are God's chosen people, but his love extends to us Gentiles, sometimes even using us as examples of the truth regarding FAITH.
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 11:09 AM   #188
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
you skipped this paragraph while you were reading didn't you?

secondly, what we refer to as the inerrant Word of God is the original text. i do not consider our current translations and versions completely inerrant and free from translational issues and issues with reinterpretation.

however, this does not mean that our current translations and versions are unreliable. read carm.org for more...
My friend, I feel you are missing my point. Yes you believe the original text is the inerrant word of God, but even the ORIGINAL TEXT is at dispute. The versions of the Bible you gave, NIV, KJV etc. are at dispute about what the original text is. It clearly isnt an issue about translation.

I'll make this simple. Let's take Mark (16:9-20) for example. The KJV bases its translations on manuscripts of this, whereas the NIV removes the verses telling us that they are fabrications not part of the "inerrant original text". What I'm really trying to say is that those versions are based on different "original texts", surely you have to acknowledge this scary fact.

I find it shocking that you say "it doesnt mean our current translations and versions are unreliable". What can you possibly mean by that? I mean, those verses are either based on the "irrerant original text" or not...

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
this isn't even worth discussing. seriously? you have a problem with how the KJV is named? no one really cares about this tidbit and i think you shouldn't either.
It was jus a little side issue, no big deal, we both know it wasnt there to thrust my argument in anyway. It's still a valid point though, especially when it says "Authorised by King James" on the front of the book. Clearly not authorised by God...

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
i'll answer this one: as many as it takes to get this right. you make it seem like the errors in the translated bible were put in there with malicious intent or to sensationalize the account beyond it's truth. if there are corrections to the bible then GREAT! but show me something that actually proves that the bible and the accounts of Jesus is a complete fabrication.
I find it heavily ironic that you say this given what I have posted earlier than today. Firstly, I have explained that manuscripts were burnt and they were written on perishable material. Therefore, I expressed doubt that we would be able to find anything earlier!

Secondly, can you tell me how these fabricated verses entered the Bible? we both know that we are having to place huge trust into copyists. Let's think logically. Many verses have been thrown out of the Bible. How did they get there in the first place? It would be indeed foolish to assume that there was never any bad motives involved. Let's recall what early church father Origen, Celsus and Dionysius said...

"The differences among the manuscripts have become great, either through the negligence of some copyists through the perverse audacity of others; they either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please." I might add that these complaints aren’t from the 9th century onwards as some people think, but rather from the 1st and early 2nd century!

Also: "Some believers, as though from a drinking bout, go so far as to appose themselves and alter the original text of the gospel three four or several times over, and they change it's character to enable them to deny difficulties in face of criticisms." – Celsus

"When my fellow Christians invited me to write letters to them I did so. These the devil's apostles have filled with tares, taking away some things and adding others. For them the woe is reserved. Small wonder then if some have dared to tamper even with the word of the Lord himself, when they have conspired to mutilate my own humble efforts." – Dionysius

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
the fact is you have none. none of the errors show that Jesus work in ministry was sensationalized into miracles. none of the errors show that Jesus did not really die on the cross and did not come back to life on the third day. all you are doing is nitpicking at the small things.
That's actually not quite true. If we look at Mark, Jesus (AS) refers to God as “The Father” only once. John has it recorded as 73 times. Mark records Jesus as calling God his own father only 3 times. John has it at a scary 100 times. This promotes the trinity and Son-Father relationship coincidently.

Mark has Jesus talking about “the Kingdom of God” (which is in the Lord’s prayer) 18 times, but John only has it as 5. We see a reversal or what we seen before and a reduction in Jesus’ original teachings. Mark has Jesus (AS) referring to himself “I am this, I am that” only 9 times. John has it as 118 times. I’m sure you can see where I’m going with this…

However, John make Jesus (AS) talk about himself more, but in a different way too. Look at the thing we see only in John:

“I and the Father are one”, “Whoever has seen me has seen the father”, “For God so loved the world he gave the world his only begotten son.” “I am the way, the truth and the light, no man cometh unto the father but by me”. Etc…

Just a coincidence? I dont think so. Especially not when John 3:16 for example has been thrown out the Bible as a fabrication. Also friend, can you tell me that you are 100% that the original texts are the complete word of God? Think how many manuscripts were burned. Think how many must have been lost. Think about the way the 4 Gospels were chosen. How can you be sure that none of God's word is missing? and how can you be sure that what you say is God's word IS actually the word of God?

Also, If the Gospel writers are trying to show Jesus (AS)’s true teachings, why is there a reduction of Jesus (AS)’s true teachings and an increase in Paul’s teachings? How can the last Gospel have statements that make Jesus so divine, but the other Gospel writers don’t have them? Seems strange to me. ESPECIALLY if you are going to argue that Matthew was an eyewitness. Many people argue that he wasn’t, I think they might be right. I think the time difference between the Gospels and between the Gospels and the “crucifixion” make it hugely possible that Jesus (AS)’s original teachings are corrupted and lost. Also, we will never know what corruption has happened in Mark’s Gospel since there isn’t one before it. We only have Paul’s writings before it. Here’s something else interesting. Let’s look at the heightening of Jesus (AS)’s position until it reaches Godhood:

Mark: Peter said “Rabbi it is good for us to be here”
Matthew: “Rabbi” is replaced with “Lord”

Mark: “…don’t know when the master of the house is coming”
Matthew: “master” is replaced with “Lord”

Mark: Peter said “You are the Messiah”
Matthew: “You are the Messiah, son of the living God

Mark: Jesus said “whoever does the will of God is my brother, sister and mother”
Matthew: “God” is replaced with “my father in heaven”

Mark: “Teacher, you do not care that we are perishing?”
Matthew: “Lord, save us, we are perishing! (they instead pray to Jesus)

Mark: “The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.
Matthew: skips straight to part about “love”. He doesn’t include oneness of God.

Mark: In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"
Matthew: When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked.

Mark: Jesus cured many
Matthew: Jesus cured all

Mark: Jesus healed many
Matthew: Jesus healed all

Mark: Why do you call me good? Noone is good but God alone
Matthew: Why do you ask me about what is good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
lol. just because i don't read it doesn't mean it's not a good bible to rely on. but i've never heard of the RSV. the way i determine whether a particular translation is good or not is whether certain verses hold true to doctrine. there are some passages in specific versions that convey the wrong idea, or is not clear about the idea and this is what i consider wrong. there are certain translations that i never touch because i feel it is too watered out in order to make it easier to read.
Should that be the deciding factor if something is good or not? Consider what I have said above. Clearly we have to ask ourselves what manuscripts are truthfull and which arent. We cant just jump straight to the part AFTER we accept it as the word of God and then see if it fits in with the doctrine and conveys the message properly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
you might be right with your conclusion, but john 10 is not the only place we can derive a triune God from. again, carm.org has that information in a nicely organized table for you.
Well we were talking about John 10. You were saying I took it out of context, so I put it into its chapter context and the context of the whole Gospel to prove the point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
i don't know about your beliefs on this, but there are things beyond this physical world that is in action. the spiritual realm is real. and spiritually, Christ is in me. spiritually, i am one with my brothers and sisters. spiritually i can see the Father and i interact with Him daily. so spiritually, the verses are very literal.
Of course so. But that is based upon your personal thoughts and feelings. Like I said before, a hindu will also tell you that their scripture is spiritualy literal and they can feel their elephant God within them. It proves nothing. It's really very simple. We have two verses using the same words written by the same author. If you want to accept one as proof of a trinity, then you gotta accept God is in 14 parts

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
here is what we believe. let me first define holiness. it is everything that makes God who he is. your definition isn't wrong, but it's very shallow. what makes God holy? it's his love, righteousness, mercy, justice, grace, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience. nothing can be more than holy because holiness is perfection. if you were to strive for the highest, it is holiness you strive for.
Yeah I agree I was a little shallow when I described God's level of holiness. However, dont think that Islam is shallow about it. Take a look at the 99 names based on attributes that we give to Allah. Many people learn these by heart, just like the Quran.

1 Ar-Rahman (الرحمن) The All Beneficent
2 Ar-Rahim (الرحيم) The Most Merciful
3 Al-Malik (الملك) The King, The Sovereign
4 Al-Quddus (القدوس) The Most Holy
5 As-Salaam (السلام) The Peace and Blessing
6 Al-Mu'min (المؤمن) The Guarantor
7 Al-Muhaymin (المهيمن) The Guardian, The Preserver
8 Al-Aziz (العزيز) The Almighty, The Self Sufficient
9 Al-Jabbar (الجبار) The Powerful, The Irresistible
10 Al-Mutakabbir (المتكبر) The Tremendous
11 Al-Khaliq (الخالق) The Creator
12 Al-Bari' (البارئ) The Rightfull
13 Al-Musawwir (المصور) The Fashioner of Forms
14 Al-Ghaffar (الغفار) The Ever Forgiving
15 Al-Qahhar (القهار) The All Compelling Subduer
16 Al-Wahhab (الوهاب) The Bestower
17 Ar-Razzaq (الرزاق) The Ever Providing
18 Al-Fattah (الفتاح) The Opener, The Victory Giver
19 Al-`Alim (العليم) The All Knowing, The Omniscient
20 Al-Qabid (القابض) The Restrainer, The Straightener
21 Al-Basit (الباسط) The Expander, The Munificent
22 Al-Khafid (الخافض) The Abaser
23 Ar-Rafi‘e (الرافع) The Exalter
24 Al-Mu‘ezz (المعز) The Giver of Honour
25 Al-Mudhell (المذل) The Giver of Dishonour
26 As-Sami‘e (السميع) The All Hearing
27 Al-Basir (البصير) The All Seeing
28 Al-Hakam (الحكم) The Judge, The Arbitrator
29 Al-`Adl (العدل) The Utterly Just
30 Al-Latif (اللطيف) The Subtly Kind
31 Al-Khabir (الخبير) The All Aware
32 Al-Halim (الحليم) The Forbearing, The Indulgent
33 Al-Azeem (العظيم) The Magnificent, The Infinite
34 Al-Ghafur (الغفور) The All Forgiving
35 Ash-Shakur (الشكور) The Grateful
36 Al-Aliyy (العلي) The Sublimely Exalted
37 Al-Kabir (الكبير) The Great
38 Al-Hafiz (الحفيظ) The Preserver
39 Al-Muqit (المقيت) The Nourisher
40 Al-Hasib (الحسيب) The Reckoner
41 Al-Jalil (الجليل) The Majestic
42 Al-Karim (الكريم) The Bountiful, The Generous
43 Ar-Raqib (الرقيب) The Watchful
44 Al-Mujib (المجيب) The Responsive, The Answerer
45 Al-Wasse‘e (الواسع) The Vast, The All Encompassing
46 Al-Hakeem (الحكيم) The Wise
47 Al-Wadud (الودود) The Loving, The Kind One
48 Al-Majid (المجيد) The All Glorious
49 Al-Ba'ith (الباعث) The Raiser of The Dead
50 Ash-Shaheed (الشهيد) The Witness
51 Al-Haqq (الحق) The Truth, The Real
52 Al-Wakil (الوكيل) The Trustee, The Dependable
53 Al-Qawaie (القوى) The Strong
54 Al-Matin (المتين) The Firm, The Steadfast
55 Al-Walaie (الولى) The Protecting Friend, Patron and Helper
56 Al-Hamid (الحميد) The All Praiseworthy
57 Al-Muhsi (المحصى) The Accounter, The Numberer of All
58 Al-Mubdi' (المبدئ) The Producer, Originator, and Initiator of All
59 Al-Mu‘id (المعيد) The Reinstater Who Brings Back All
60 Al-Muhyi (المحيى) The Giver of Life
61 Al-Mumit (المميت) The Bringer of Death, The Destroyer
62 Al-Hayy (الحي) The Ever Living
63 Al-Qayyum (القيوم) The Self Subsisting Sustainer of All
64 Al-Wajid (الواجد) The Perceiver, The Finder, The Unfailing
65 Al-Majid (الماجد) The Illustrious, The Magnificent
66 Al-Wahid (الواحد) The One, The Unique, Manifestation of Unity
67 Al-Ahad (الاحد) The One, the All Inclusive, The Indivisible
68 As-Samad (الصمد) The Self Sufficient, The Impregnable, The Eternally Besought of All, The Everlasting
69 Al-Qadir (القادر) The All Able
70 Al-Muqtadir (المقتدر) The All Determiner, The Dominant
71 Al-Muqaddim (المقدم) The Expediter, He Who Brings Forward
72 Al-Mu'akhir (المؤخر) The Delayer, He Who Puts Far Away
73 Al-Awwal (الأول) The First
74 Al-Akhir (الأخر) The Last
75 Az-Zahir (الظاهر) The Manifest, The All Victorious
76 Al-Batin (الباطن) The Hidden, The All Encompassing
77 Al-Wali (الوالي) The Patron
78 Al-Muta'ali (المتعالي) The Self Exalted
79 Al-Barr (البر) The Most Kind and Righteous
80 At-Tawwab (التواب) The Ever Returning, Ever Relenting
81 Al-Muntaqim (المنتقم) The Avenger
82 Al-‘Afuww (العفو) The Pardoner, The Effacer of Sins
83 Ar-Ra'uf (الرؤوف) The Compassionate, The All Pitying
84 Malik-al-Mulk (مالك الملك) The Owner of All Sovereignty
85 Dhu-al-Jalali wa-al-Ikram (ذو الجلال و الإكرام) The Lord of Majesty and Generosity
86 Al-Muqsit (المقسط) The Equitable, The Requiter
87 Al-Jami‘e (الجامع) The Gatherer, The Unifier
88 Al-Ghanaie (الغنى) The All Rich, The Independent
89 Al-Mughni (المغنى) The Enricher, The Emancipator
90 Al-Mani'e (المانع) The Withholder, The Shielder, the Defender
91 Ad-Darr (الضار) The Distressor, The Harmer (This attribute can only be found in hadith)
92 An-Nafi‘e (النافع) The Propitious, The Benefactor
93 An-Nur (النور) The Light
94 Al-Hadi (الهادي) The Guide
95 Al-Badi (البديع) The Incomparable, The Originator
96 Al-Baqi (الباقي) The Ever Enduring and Immutable
97 Al-Warith (الوارث) The Heir, The Inheritor of All
98 Ar-Rashid (الرشيد) The Guide, Infallible Teacher and Knower
99 As-Sabur (الصبور) The Patient, The Timeless.

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
God is the only person complete in holiness. do i believe people are holy? yes, and i agree with you that it is a different level of holiness. human holiness. the holiness of man will never ever be on the same level as the holiness of God. i don't care if you're mother theresa, you will have sinned in some way, shape, or form and the fact that you have one speckle of sin, however small, makes you unholy in the eyes of God.
I agree with this too, mostly. However, we need to know what God requires of us. Does God require us to be 100% all the time? Of course not. This is where I feel Christianity fails. Allah tells us in the Quran that "man was created weak". He also tells us many ways to earn his happiness. In many ways it's just like the Bible. Recall Ezekiel 18 where it said that if man shall turn from sin "he shall surely live, he will not die". Also, Allah tells us many times to uphold the law/commandment. Jesus (AS) in the Bible also teaches this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
we also believe that there is nothing we can do on our own to become holy enough to have a proper relationship with God. this is what breaks God's heart. this is why Jesus had to come down to save us. He loved us so much that He sent His only son to take the punishment we so rightly deserve so that our relationship with God can be restored to it's rightful state, as it was between adam and eve before the original sin. Jesus died so that we may live.
Let's consider why the original sin even happened. It happened because "man was created weak". Therefore, as Allah points out in the Quran, he doesnt require 100% from us all the time. He is very merciful. He does however point out that depending on your level of holiness you will earn a certain reward. There are many rewards for different types of people. It's really that simple.

Also, I cant share the belief that there is nothing we can do on our own to become holy enough. Recall this verse:

“Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
Matthew (5:19)


Therefore we see that we just need to follow the way of life that Allah ordained best for us. This will earn his happiness with us and our reward from him.

Also, you speak about restoring the relationship between Adam/Eve (AS) and God. The Quran teaches us that Allah forgave them of their sins and that the relationship was restored. This shows that "he will surely live, he will not die". You see how the relationship was immediately restored when Adam/Eve (AS) “turned away from all the sins they has committed and keeps all God's decrees and does what is just and right”. Thus we learn that we arent here to restore the relationship of Adam/Eve since it was already restored. But rather, we were given our own lives to choose the path of good or bad. Clearly every individual has the choice of creating that relationship with God. We arent here to restore Adam/Eve's (AS). What I'm tryna say is bro, Adam/Eve (AS)'s relationship with God isnt the same as ours. We all have one-to-one relationships with him. However, that relationship might be one where Allah is happy with you or ISNT happy with you. Further proof that we are judged by our OWN actions is found in the same chapter of the Bible:

The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.
Ezekiel (18:20)


Oh yeah, it's ironic that you said "He loved us so much that He sent His only son to take the punishment". Did you know that John 3:16 has been thrown out of the Bible?

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den
here are some reasons people typically can't believe in Christianity. they have too much pride to believe that they can't save themselves. they, being better than most people, are good enough to be with a holy God.

which one are you? do you believe you are righteous enough to be rewarded with being in the presence of Holiness?
I believe exactly what I just said. If I sin, I will die. If I turn away from sin, I will surely live, not die. It's really that simple. So yes, if I turn away from my sin I can be rightous/holy on a human level and earn reward from Allah.

May Allah grant you peace and knowledge to understand his true plan for you which he taught us from Prophet Adam (AS) to Prophet Muhammed (SAW), through his Angels and books and clear signs. Ameen.
__________________

Last edited by hks786; 09-26-2007 at 11:26 PM.
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 11:11 AM   #189
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleWede View Post
I can't quote the verse, but I see it often in evangelistic writings. It's a problem with translation and is teh other side of grey. In English, "Beleive ON the word of God" makes no sense, but the evangelical are so adamant about their preaching the word of God and not their own, they won't change the biblical reference to be proper English (IMHO). It's a simple change, but should be written "Beleive IN the word of God"

I suspect there is that similar type of translation "issue" when converting ANY religious writing into another language. Allah's target was Muhamed, so he "spoke" to him in his native tongue. Although all are his creation, some had a bit of advantage in that they could more readily understand teh native tongue. Just like the Jews are God's chosen people, but his love extends to us Gentiles, sometimes even using us as examples of the truth regarding FAITH.

Yeah +1 about the translation issue BUT I have pointed out that there are versions of the Bible that rely on different manuscripts which claim to be the "original text". There can be only one "original text", but I assure you those many versions rely on different ones. I have explained better above.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 01:12 PM   #190
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
50
Rep
2,376
Posts

 
Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

Mark: Peter said “Rabbi it is good for us to be here”
Matthew: “Rabbi” is replaced with “Lord”

Mark: “…don’t know when the master of the house is coming”
Matthew: “master” is replaced with “Lord”

Mark: Peter said “You are the Messiah”
Matthew: “You are the Messiah, son of the living God

Mark: Jesus said “whoever does the will of God is my brother, sister and mother”
Matthew: “God” is replaced with “my father in heaven”

Mark: “Teacher, you do not care that we are perishing?”
Matthew: “Lord, save us, we are perishing! (they instead pray to Jesus)

Mark: “The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.
Matthew: skips straight to part about “love”. He doesn’t include oneness of God.

Mark: In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"
Matthew: When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked.

Mark: Jesus cured many
Matthew: Jesus cured all

Mark: Jesus healed many
Matthew: Jesus healed all

Mark: Why do you call me good? Noone is good but God alone
Matthew: Why do you ask me about what is good?


In almost every one of these cases, if it's written by a different author, do you really expect them to say the exact same thing? I sure don't, otherwise they lose some credibility. But is there anything lost between using Rabbi and Lord? Between the way the fig tree is described as dying? There isn't any difference in the meaning of the story that is related.

Jesus did not heal all (who came to him) he healed many, because some were not true of heart, some were just imposters trying to label him a false prophet.
I beleive by looking so closely at the details, the statements are not in their complete context. That's part of why I dislike the use of the chapter/verse method of quoting the bible, it often leads to mis-interpretation, as I am sure many would claim the same thing related to the use of the Quran to justify the actions of certain individuals of quetionable faith and the actions they take against other people. How maligned has teh Quran become in recent years because of this out-of-context quoting?
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 01:16 PM   #191
mesier1111
Banned
mesier1111's Avatar
20
Rep
1,628
Posts

 
Drives: 335i coupe, titanium
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bucks County, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by enfield View Post
My view is that Jesus did not die for anyone. Jesus did not exist so how could a fictional character die for anyone's sins or good deeds?

LMFAO.............amen. +1
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 01:24 PM   #192
mesier1111
Banned
mesier1111's Avatar
20
Rep
1,628
Posts

 
Drives: 335i coupe, titanium
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bucks County, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FloridaBoy View Post
YES, Jesus died for the sins of the world, even yours hks786.

I find it strange that a Muslim would feign "respect," for Christians in his first post, when your entire thread is intentionally posing rhetorical questions again and again, all designed just so you can throw stones at the Diety of our Christian Saviour, the sacrificial love of God's Only Begotten Son, the truth of the our Christian Bible, and the precious blood atonement of our Christian doctrine.

With all due "respect," you are no more interested in the truth of the Christian message than the man on the moon. You strike me as a wolf in sheep's clothing, and that is not looking good considering what your Muslim brothers are doing around the world. No matter how much you dress it up, the sin of unbelief is still a horrible sin, especially when it is used to try and decieve others. The Holy Bible states clearly, "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." John 3:18

Anyone who wants to know the truth about Jesus; please don't waste your time with intelligent, yet decieved unbelievers who "respectfully" try to convince you that Jesus was a liar and that His great sacrifice was a waste. I will not debate on this forum or answer rhetorical questions, if you really want to know the truth about Jesus, PM me and I will try my best to help you. The links below will show you a brief outline of real Bibllcal salvation by the gift of God's grace, (not works or religion), the last one will show you what "respectful" Muslims are doing to Christians all around the world. God bless, and I leave you with the promise of the Saviour...

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16-17

And His solemn warnings...

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." Matthew 7:15-20

Former Muslim Turns to Jesus, now speaks the Truth in love
(Muslims please watch these 3 powerful videos!)





God's simple plan for your salvation:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/howtobesaved.htm

Biblical Truth compared to Islam:
http://www.answering-islam.org/index.html

The intolerant fruit of global Islam:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/...inst_chri.html
You're nuts, you know that? Right off your rocker. This whole thread is fucking ridiculous. Why not everyone just get the fuck along, stop worry about some stupid shit written in a book and told to you by your parents because their parents told them it. Stop hating and finding the diffrences. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddist, who gives a shit what you are, no one is right, no one is wrong. You all need to more.
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 02:24 PM   #193
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
50
Rep
2,376
Posts

 
Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

I drink plenty, that's why I went Catholic, they give you wine even at 8:00 mass on Sunday morning. And to paraphrase a bibilical verse (poorly) "wheresoever you find 4 Catholics, you'll find a fifth"

J/K!!!!
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 02:42 PM   #194
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleWede View Post
In almost every one of these cases, if it's written by a different author, do you really expect them to say the exact same thing? I sure don't, otherwise they lose some credibility. But is there anything lost between using Rabbi and Lord? Between the way the fig tree is described as dying? There isn't any difference in the meaning of the story that is related.
I feel that explanation doesnt really work. I'll show why...

- The first point about being using Rabbi and Lord as synonymous terms doesnt work. The reason is that in some places of the Bible, the title "Son of God" has also been inserted and was removed as a fabrication. This shows that copyists had hidden motives and were very keen to promote Jesus (AS)' status. There's more though...

Let's recall the huge differences in how many time Jesus (AS) refers to God as "Father" and as his own Father. I'm sorry but the increase from 3 to 100 is just unacceptable. The same applies to the difference between 1 and 73. It just shows that the Gospel writers wanted to put their own spin on Jesus (AS). There is also a huge reduction in Jesus (AS)'s teachings and increase in Pauls. Also, John's Gospels has verses that we find NOWHERE else. How strange. It was written WAY after all the other Gospels yet it seems to have verses that Mark, Matthew & Luke didnt have. The mystery increases when we find out that verses like John 3:16 have been removed from the Bible because we have learned that it was an interpolation, not the word of God.

- The next 3 examples are sort of similar in changing the status of Jesus (AS) by what he is reffered to as.

- Mark then has Jesus (AS) as questioned for not caring. Matthew has it that they prayed to Jesus (AS). There can only be one true answer. This would imply the Bible has verses than are NOT the word of God. How can we trust it and say it hasnt been corrupted?

- The next one is very scary indeed. Here Matthew forgets the main message of Jesus (AS) and skips straight to loving God. This is another reduction of Jesus (AS)'s original teachings so that the trinity could be promoted more.

I dont think that it depends on the target audience. Let's consider the tiny chapter 112 in the Quran:

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.


Now look. Every muslim all over the world reads this. It teaches the oneness of Allah. But does it change the message for the people of Israel or Chinese muslims? No. It is the SAME.

- The next one is pretty obvious. Jesus (AS) cursed the tree but Mark said it withered the next morning. Matthew says it withered at once. I think they are actually losing credibility rather than gaining it due to the contradiction.

- I cant actually remember the context for the next two so I'll try find out. I'm sure it was the same event described though. Nevertheless, I'll find out.

- This one is extremely obvious. Look how Matthew reworked it so that Jesus (AS) doesnt look like a Prophet of Allah. If Jesus (AS) doesnt let us call him good, how can we call him God? If he is God and rejects the attribute of being God, this is blasphemy. How can God not be good?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 02:48 PM   #195
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mesier1111 View Post
You're nuts, you know that? Right off your rocker. This whole thread is fucking ridiculous. Why not everyone just get the fuck along, stop worry about some stupid shit written in a book and told to you by your parents because their parents told them it. Stop hating and finding the diffrences. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddist, who gives a shit what you are, no one is right, no one is wrong. You all need to more.
How ironic. You tell us to forget our differences so that we can get along, but then you call the stuff in our scriptures "stupid s***". Clearly this would only ever provoke anger from Christians, Muslims and many other people. Also, did you have to belittle our faith in religions? That was totally unacceptable.

Also, pay attention. We arent hating. We are trying to understand eachother. It's a step towards brotherhood REGARDLESS of faith. Oh sorry, exception to FloridaBoy. Oh yeah, and if YOUR parents taught you that drink is the solution to everything, I would say that I'm more worried about you
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 03:36 PM   #196
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
50
Rep
2,376
Posts

 
Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

Well, I have that one - one relationship with God, I hear what he tells me when I go in private to pray to him. The bible is a guide to open my heart to his gentle knock and allow the saving grace that is Jesus enter and LIVE in my heart. THAT is what saves me from eternal death, not anything I do or say. I can no more "earn" heaven than the camel can pass thru the eye of a needle, it's only when I accept the GIFT of salvation that I get there.

About all I can think of as the actual word of God in the bible is the 10 commandments and the "statement" that this is my only begotten son. And since I can't quote you the chapter or verse, I guess it goes to show that I no longer need a book of written human words to ensure my faith, Jesus lives in my heart and speaks directly to me. Not like voices telling me what to do either
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 03:45 PM   #197
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
481
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleWede View Post
Well, I have that one - one relationship with God, I hear what he tells me when I go in private to pray to him. The bible is a guide to open my heart to his gentle knock and allow the saving grace that is Jesus enter and LIVE in my heart. THAT is what saves me from eternal death, not anything I do or say. I can no more "earn" heaven than the camel can pass thru the eye of a needle, it's only when I accept the GIFT of salvation that I get there.

About all I can think of as the actual word of God in the bible is the 10 commandments and the "statement" that this is my only begotten son. And since I can't quote you the chapter or verse, I guess it goes to show that I no longer need a book of written human words to ensure my faith, Jesus lives in my heart and speaks directly to me. Not like voices telling me what to do either

Trust me bro, I do understand what you're saying. However, these theological ideas that you have are based on your interpretation of the Bible. We have already discovered that the Bible has been corrupted etc. How can we trust it? Otherwise I could ask why you arent Hindu? I mean, they find great spiritual comfort in their way of life and profess that it is the true path in life. This isnt really proof...

I think you're talking about John 3:16 btw, it has been removed from the Bible.

For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
John (3:16)
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-26-2007, 04:23 PM   #198
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
50
Rep
2,376
Posts

 
Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

My ideas are based on my own personal experience, color a bit by the bible which opened the door to listening to that loving voice in my heart.

No, I beleive it was around the time of Jesus' birth when God boomed down "This is my only begotten son, in whom my favor rests"

And since when was 3:16 removed from the bible? Maybe I do need to get that DVD loaded . . .
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:55 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST