Islam Are Allah and God of the Bible the same Person?

[Muslim-UK]

Yes and I refuted this and gave you the reference that Baca is a Mediterranean Town not Mecca. I still have not changed my view.
Sorry we are crossing lines here, is it not you showing me that Mecca was a pre Islamic Town? If you referring to Petra, as a Muslim you should know better.

Ok Mecca pre-Islam:

The material conditions under which the Arabs lived began to improve around 1000 B.C. About this time, a method for saddling camels had been developed to transport large loads. The camel was the only animal that could cross large tracts of barren land with any reliability. The Arabs could now benefit from some of the trade that had previously circumvented Arabia. The increased trans-Arabian trade produced two important results. One was the rise of cities that could service the trains of camels moving across the desert. The most prosperous of these — Petra in Jordan, associated with the Nabatean Kingdom, and Palmyra in Syria, for example—were relatively close to markets 5 Saudi Arabia: A Country Study in the Mediterranean region, but small caravan cities developed within the Arabian Peninsula as well. One of the ancient cities that formed part of the Nabatean Kingdom from about 25 B.C. to the end of the first century A.D. was Madain Salin, the ruins of which still exist. The most important of these caravan cities was Mecca, which also owed its prosperity to certain shrines in the area that were visited by Arabs from all over the peninsula.

Some Arabs, particularly in the Hijaz, held religious beliefs that recognized a number of gods as well as a number of rituals for worshiping them. The most important of these beliefs involved the sense that certain places and times of year were sacred and must be respected. At those times and in those places, warfare, in particular, was forbidden, and various rituals were required. Foremost of these was the pilgrimage, and the best known pilgrimage site was Mecca. The second result of the Arabs' increased involvement in trade was the contact it gave them with the outside world. In the Near East, the Persians and the Romans were the great powers in the centuries before the advent of Islam, and the Arab tribes that bordered these territories were drawn into their political affairs. After A.D. 400, both empires paid Arab tribes not only to protect their southern borders but also to harass the borders of their adversaries.

http://cdn.loc.gov/master/frd/frdcstdy/sa/saudiarabiacount00metz_0/saudiarabiacount00metz_0.pdf

The source comes from the following book:
Arabia and the Arabs

Well I did not expect you to agree, yes the how was not explained, yet I assume it is detective type of scrutiny of each text, common and repeated teaching would then form a core of the message ect. Similar I suppose to the Hadith ratings in a way.

Ok I did some searching to see if Christian Apologist, Professor Daniel Wallace gave written evidence for reconstructing the NT:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=905628532842275

So yes, it can be reconstructed to the 4th Century.

I have never know anyone say the bible is the unaltered word of God, because we are taught there are differences and all Bibles show them in the foot notes.

BibleGateway.com: A searchable online Bible in over 150 versions and 50 languages. There are no foot notes in the KJV online or in book form, which means the translators were happy for people to be mislead for hundreds of years. I guess their spirit of truth needed a little adjustment.

Please go check post # 264. You can apologise later.

264 has 2 debates Mike Licona admitting Gospel writers were making things up and Dan Wallace debating Bart and affirming originals are lost, but can be constructed to the 4th Century as per the facebook link.

That is why enjoy this site or debates as it enriches my faith and helps with insight as to how Muslims think. Beside it is preparation for missionary work I want to do in years to come.

With the 2 experiences you recounted and your conviction, I'm sure you'll do fine.
Just don't get tricked by the devil, whose never far away:
Many missionaries are phony and fake and very damaging

 

[Muslim-UK]

Jay Smith shows that it was in fact Petra not Jerusalem were the prayer was directed, using 12 plus mosques in the first hundred years after Muhammad. There was then a 100 plus or minus of uncertainty and suddenly if I am correct 907AD prayer was directed to Mecca Buy 917ad all Mosques universal inn this.

Could you tell me which Mosques and why you think they face the wrong direction or is it just Jay says so, like he did with Mecca not existing before the 10th Century?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Why the name Al-Maseh מָשִׁיחַ‎ المسيح is translated ?

It's not a name. The Hebrew word meshiach is translated as christos in Greek. It's a title, not a name.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Formulation of Christian belief has just started on 325 ACE, it didn't stop. Every council someone get kicked off and a new Church is established till date.

False.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Muslim-UK]

Yes and I refuted this and gave you the reference that Baca is a Mediterranean Town not Mecca. I still have not changed my view.

Yes you made the following comments:

Baca is on the Mediterranean coast,Paran in Easton's Bible Dictionary abounding in foliage, or abounding in caverns, (Gen. 21:21), a desert tract forming the north-eastern division of the peninsula of Sinai, lying between the 'Arabah on the east and the wilderness of Shur on the west. This is mile to the noth of current day Mecca.

Where is the House of worship open 24/7 that Pilgrims visit then, were a single prayer is better than a Thousand elsewhere.

I also chuckle that you demand non Islamic sources, yet use Evangelical Christian sources to support your case :/

 

[Muslim-UK]

False.

-CryptoLutheran

Not entirely false, and certainly not without explaining why.

There were differing views from the Second Century onwards.

Constantine summoned the Bishops from across the Roman Empire to oversee their infighting, which threatened stability, and decide amongst themselves whether Jesus pbuh was a remarkable man, with divine like powers, made below the Father, (Arius view) or wholly divine, (Bishop Alexander's view) and if so, what was his "substance" made from. It was a heated debate and finally the outcome:

…We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from Life, Son Only-begotten, first-born of every creature, before all the ages, begotten from the Father, by Whom also all things were made; Who for our salvation was made flesh, and lived among men, and suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended to the Father, and will come again in glory to judge the quick and dead. etc etc

Another Council later in the same Century affirmed inclusion of the Holy Ghost as a Divine being consubstantial with the Father and the Son.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Not entirely false, and certainly not without explaining why.

Whatever resulting schisms followed some of the early ecumenical councils did not constitute starting a brand new church. The most significant to speak of is the Chalcedonian Schism, which resulted in a split within the Church between the Chalcedonians and the non-Chalcedonians. The non-Chalcedonians, known today as the Oriental Orthodox, are comprised of the Coptic, Syriac, Ethiopian, Eritrean, and Armenian Christians; and even though the disputes surrounding this incident resulted in a schism within the Church both sides would agree that no new church was begun. At present the dialogue between the Chalcedonian Eastern Orthodox and the non-Chalcedonian Oriental Orthodox is such that there is a general agreement of a shared orthodoxy; that ultimately the Chalcedonian dispute is largely a matter of semantics, not theological substance. And that is the most significant case to speak of, second to it might be the Nestorian controversy.

There were differing views from the Second Century onwards.

Sure, but the existence of a pretty thorough consensus of belief can be seen in the writings of the fathers. When I presented such an example of such you, in our previous discussion, merely chose to dismiss it.

Constantine summoned the Bishops from across the Roman Empire to oversee their infighting, which threatened stability, and decide amongst themselves whether Jesus pbuh was a remarkable man, with divine like powers, made below the Father, (Arius view) or wholly divine, (Bishop Alexander's view) and if so, what was his "substance" made from. It was a heated debate and finally the outcome:

…We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from Life, Son Only-begotten, first-born of every creature, before all the ages, begotten from the Father, by Whom also all things were made; Who for our salvation was made flesh, and lived among men, and suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended to the Father, and will come again in glory to judge the quick and dead. etc etc

There were, fundamentally, two sides in the dispute: the Arian view and the view that has become known as the Nicene view.

Nobody at the council, nor anyone involved in the dispute, argued that Jesus was merely a remarkable man; everyone involved Jesus was divine, and called Him "God". The dispute was centered exclusively on what that meant; was Jesus another God entirely (the Arian view) or was Jesus the same God as the Father (the view of Alexander and what is asserted in the symbol put forward at Nicea.

Another Council later in the same Century affirmed inclusion of the Holy Ghost as a Divine being consubstantial with the Father and the Son.

Yes, that was the Council of Constantinople, which put forward the current form of the Creed (sans filioque) and was specifically in address to the Pneumatomachoi.

Neither the Councils of Nicea nor Constantinople resulted in the creation of a new church; the issue was to assert what was, in fact, the orthodox faith and what was error. Disagree with the conclusions of the councils if you prefer, but nothing asserted was new, but was in keeping with the traditions and confession already present within the Church. The Deity of the Son is easily demonstrable from the biblical and patristic record; which is why Christological debates were almost always about what it meant to say Jesus was divine, not whether Jesus was divine. That Jesus was divine was taken for granted; but what that meant was hashed out in the early centuries. There were groups that rejected Jesus' divinity entirely, but they were not by any means connected with anything resembling a Christian mainstream: the Ebionites, as best as we can tell, were a sect of Judaizing Christians who regarded Jesus to be an ordinary mortal human being born the natural offspring of Joseph and Mary, who regarded St. Paul to be a false apostle, subscribed to extreme rigorist, ascetic teachings such as mandatory vegetarianism, and possibly in a later period had subscribed to some Gnostic or semi-Gnostic teachings (depending on whether or not Epiphanius has confused them with other quasi-Judeo-Christian gnostic sects such as the Elcasaites, of which Mani, the founder of Manicheanism, was one.

Such views were never entertained in anything resembling the Christian mainstream; and does not resemble anything of the earliest available material in the Christian historical record; of which the recognized authentically Pauline literary corpus is the earliest--that is to say, to postulate some "pure" pre-Pauline Christianity of which the "Pauline" variety is a corruption is to engage in idle speculation, there exists nothing earlier than Paul by which to discern Christian beliefs, and it would seem to be (at least Paul's own opinion) that what he has to say was consistent with already established beliefs of the Christian community, c.f. 1 Corinthians 15:3-9

The alternative largely amounts to speculation and conspiracy theory.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[DWA2DAY]

There are no foot notes in the KJV online or in book form, which means the translators were happy for people to be mislead for hundreds of years.

Yes it seems you are right, I have never questioned this before and just assumed. I have an old KJV from my grandfather no printing date but non the less no foot notes either.
However in our defence if I may the History of the King James bible was to take the Latin bible held by the Catholic church and make it available in English for the masses to understand. This in its own right is a problem that our history is clear that the Catholic Church at the time was more power hungry than worrying about Jesus Christ gospel.

Be that as it may and the errors we face till an younger manuscript has be found to show the alleged corruption with the evidence we have I do not believe we have missed the mark to the extent you would like to see.

In it self is good that we have this free transmission and not the controlled version as with the Quran as it allows the christian to progressively grow in true in His relationship with Christ.

Re Bart, nothing new that we have not discussed. Unless there is a point you wish to make

With the 2 experiences you recounted and your conviction, I'm sure you'll do fine.
Just don't get tricked by the devil, whose never far away:

[whose never far away:[/QUOTE]

Got me laughing again, but thank you for the heads up.

Regards

 

[DWA2DAY]

Not entirely false, and certainly not without explaining why.

There were differing views from the Second Century onwards.

Constantine summoned the Bishops from across the Roman Empire to oversee their infighting, which threatened stability, and decide amongst themselves whether Jesus pbuh was a remarkable man, with divine like powers, made below the Father, (Arius view) or wholly divine, (Bishop Alexander's view) and if so, what was his "substance" made from. It was a heated debate and finally the outcome:

…We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from Life, Son Only-begotten, first-born of every creature, before all the ages, begotten from the Father, by Whom also all things were made; Who for our salvation was made flesh, and lived among men, and suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended to the Father, and will come again in glory to judge the quick and dead. etc etc

Another Council later in the same Century affirmed inclusion of the Holy Ghost as a Divine being consubstantial with the Father and the Son.

Yes you are correct but you miss-understand that this was not a new practice that was suddenly decided on and after the council the Christians of the time had a new faith.
It was simply the affirming and formalisation of what was been practised by the church. Keep in mind the council was not called for the purpose of defining the Trinity or the Cannon but to discuss the false religion of Arianisim.

 

[DWA2DAY]

Yes you made the following comments:



Where is the House of worship open 24/7 that Pilgrims visit then, were a single prayer is better than a Thousand elsewhere.

I also chuckle that you demand non Islamic sources, yet use Evangelical Christian sources to support your case :/

I am busy working through this but not a priory for me. ?watch the clip is the easiest all the info is there. Yes it is a new view that rattles the cages of faith but no more radical the Bart.

 

[DWA2DAY]

Could you tell me which Mosques and why you think they face the wrong direction or is it just Jay says so, like he did with Mecca not existing before the 10th Century?

• 
  Mecca
  According to the Quran, Mecca was the first and most important city in the world. Adam placed the black stone in the original Kaba (sanctuary) there, while Abraham and Ishmael rebuilt the Meccan Kaba centuries later (Sura 2:125-127). Mecca was allegedly the centre of Arabian trading routes before Muhammads time.
  
  Yet there is no archeological corroboration for this. Such a great ancient city would surely have received a mention in ancient history. However, the earliest reference to Mecca as a city is in the Continuato Byzantia Arabica, an 8th century document. Mecca is certainly not on the natural overland trade routes- it is a barren valley requiring a one hundred mile detour. Moreover, there was only maritime Graeco-Roman trade with India after the first century, controlled by the Ethiopian Red Sea port Adulis, not by the Arabs. If Mecca was not even a viable city, let alone a great commercial centre until after Muhammads time, the Quran is seriously in doubt.
  http://isaalmasih.net/archaeology-isa/quran-archaeology.html

Regards Doug

PS This is not your friend Jay Smith.

 

[DWA2DAY]

Could you tell me which Mosques and why you think they face the wrong direction or is it just Jay says so, like he did with Mecca not existing before the 10th Century?

Copyright © 1999 by Peter Saunders from his web page.
Qibla
According to the Quran, the direction of prayer (Qibla) was canonized towards Mecca for all Muslims circa 624 AD, two years after the Hijra (see Sura 2:144, 149-50). Yet the earliest archaeological evidence from mosques built at the beginning of the 8th century suggests their sanctuary was located a long way north of Mecca, closer to the vicinity of Jerusalem.

The Qibla of the first mosque in Kufa, Iraq, constructed in 670 AD, pointed west instead of due south. Likewise, floor plans from two later Umayyad (650-750 AD) mosques in Iraq, demonstrate their Qiblas were oriented too far north. The Wasit mosque is off by 33 degrees, the Baghdad mosque by 30 degrees. The Amr b. al As mosque near Cairo, again pointed too far north and had to be corrected under a later governor.

Jacob of Odessa, a Christian writer and traveller, was a contemporary eye-witness writing in Egypt around 705 AD. His letter in the British Museum maintains the Mahgraye (Greek term for Arabs) in Egypt prayed facing east, towards their Kaba, the place of their patriarchal origin- in other words towards Palestine, not Mecca.

Thus the evidence points to a sanctuary located not in Mecca, but in northern Arabia or even Jerusalem, until the early 8th century. It cannot be that the early Muslims wrongly estimated the direction of Mecca. They were desert traders and caravaners, adept at travelling by the stars. How else did they perform the obligatory Hajj, which was also canonized at this time? There is a serious discrepancy between the Quran and modern archaeology. Crucially, Walid I, who reigned as Caliph between 705 and 715, wrote to all the regions ordering the demolition and enlargement of all mosques. Could it be the Qibla only then shifted to Mecca?

Mecca
According to the Quran, Mecca was the first and most important city in the world. Adam placed the black stone in the original Kaba (sanctuary) there, while Abraham and Ishmael rebuilt the Meccan Kaba centuries later (Sura 2:125-127). Mecca was allegedly the centre of Arabian trading routes before Muhammads time.

Yet there is no archeological corroboration for this. Such a great ancient city would surely have received a mention in ancient history. However, the earliest reference to Mecca as a city is in the Continuato Byzantia Arabica, an 8th century document. Mecca is certainly not on the natural overland trade routes- it is a barren valley requiring a one hundred mile detour. Moreover, there was only maritime Graeco-Roman trade with India after the first century, controlled by the Ethiopian Red Sea port Adulis, not by the Arabs. If Mecca was not even a viable city, let alone a great commercial centre until after Muhammads time, the Quran is seriously in doubt.

Regards Doug

 

[Postvieww]

As I said from the start, I can provide the references, but it's not down to me to convince you. That's between you and your Creator.

Your Scholars say the unknown person who wrote Matthew, never met Jesus pbuh furthermore, he was writing to a Jewish audience and in doing so, 'Poured' over the Torah looking for unfulfilled Prophecies, making them 'Fit' around Jesus pbuh




Could you please show me from the Bible where the villages of Kedar is please.

HTTP>> Isaiah 42:11 Let the wilderness and its towns raise their voices; let the settlements where Kedar lives rejoice. Let the people of Sela sing for joy; let them shout from the mountaintops. villages, nomads, settlements of Kedar. Notice too all the translations in the link clearly refer to Sila as Mountain Tops. Not one opted for lofty, craggy rock, rock stone or stronghold. I think I'll follow what professional Translators used.




Paul isn't Jesus pbuh. Where he went, who rejected him and what he preached is irrelevant at this point.



Are you sure new song doesn't mean new covenant? Even your Scholars say, yes it does, though they attribute the new order to Jesus pbuh:

"The newness theme is reflected throughout Scripture. Isaiah prophesied of a new order that would bring new blessings to the people of God. This new order with its attendant blessings is expressed by the climax of the newness theme in the New Testament Book of Revelation: a new name."

"The new song therefore encapsulates the theology of Revelation: the redemptive work of Christ is the sine qua non for the establishment of God's kingdom."

HTTP >> New Song Definition and Meaning - Bible Dictionary

As I said, we have different perceptions of passages and prophecies found in the Torah.



What does a human characteristic of getting angry have to do with flaws and the Law of Moses?
Moses pbuh came down from the Mountain in Saudi Arabia with the commandment, Thou shall not kill. He laid eyes on his people worshipping a golden calf, got very angry and had 3000 of them killed.




Luke never met Jesus pbuh and is repeating hearsay.
Jesus pbuh was said to have also said, Matthew 10:15 "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:"

Looks like Paul for one, disregarded this commandment. Remember Mark's Gospel ended 16:8

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.



Or perhaps Christians twist scripture to make Jesus all things, make him to fulfil all Prophecies. In fact Christian Bible Commentators are able to make every single passage in the Torah appear to fit Jesus pbuh like a glove :/

Jesus pbuh was The Messiah sent to the Jews. He chose 12 Disciples with the hope they would go into all Nations and preach the message to the scattered Tribes. He was their last hope, their last chance before ALLAH swt raised a New God fearing Nation.




As I said elsewhere, John is the least reliable account when trying to know the Historical Jesus pbuh. He writes long discourses and makes no mention of key events that he was supposed to have witnessed, yet makes incredible claims of raising dead people after 4 days, that are not mentioned elsewhere. Extends the Missionary to 3.5 years, gives different reason why the Pharisees wanted to kill Jesus pbuh and even gives a different day for his crucifixion, and don't forget the long discourses that are not found elsewhere.




^^^^ Paul's Gospel ^^^^




Just as Moses took his people out of idol worship, straightened their crookedness, and led them into the glory of Monotheism. So did the Descendant of Ishmael, make a Great Nation too. Taking them away from drunkenness, idolatry and ignorance, and into the Worship of the ONE true GOD of the Universe.





Your opinion is noted.




Yes, shunned by the Disciples and cursed by God, he started his own religion.
If my lie is spreading the truth of God, why am I judged a sinner. Romans [3:7]

2 Corinthians 12:7...

"There was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me."
8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me.

GOD said NO 3 times, so Paul explained it away ...

9 But He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is perfected in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly in my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest on me.

Romans 7:19-24

For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?"



Elohim went to Pharaoh too, but oh wait, that was his representative Moses pbuh
When did Jesus pbuh become a mighty man of war? He was mocked and humbled himself, offering the other cheek remember? He was a pacifist, a peaceful man and no warrior.


Paul again



Again your opinion is noted, and I'm not here to convince you, only to show Scripture is open to interpretation, which is why you have Thousands of different denominations all claiming to have the Holy Spirit with them. And it should be pointed out Muslims never deny Jesus pbuh as the Christ who came in the flesh, or that he wasn't the son of God. In fact outside of Christianity, Islam is the only faith that says you must believe in Jesus pbuh.




Allah swt would never punish a innocent person for the sins of another. The same message is found in the Torah. Jesus pbuh prayed to be saved, and was heard. Jesus means God Saves. In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus Barabbas, meaning Jesus son of God was set free
It was Simon who bore the cross and crucified in error. 6 Disciples from the First Century all said it was Simon of Cyrene who was crucified in error, whilst Jesus pbuh laughed at their attempt to cause him harm.



This section is for people who do not believe what the Church teaches. I appreciate your prayers, and would only request you direct them to the Father Alone.

Muslim-UK said:

Your Scholars say the unknown person who wrote Matthew, never met Jesus pbuh furthermore, he was writing to a Jewish audience and in doing so, 'Poured' over the Torah looking for unfulfilled Prophecies, making them 'Fit' around Jesus pbuh

Your opinion that Matthew is not valid is noted:


You seem to be doing this yourself by trying to make Isaiah 42 fit Mohammad.

Muslim-UK said:

Or perhaps Christians twist scripture to make Jesus all things, make him to fulfil all Prophecies. In fact Christian Bible Commentators are able to make every single passage in the Torah appear to fit Jesus pbuh like a glove :/

Your opinion on the Torah and how Christians view it is noted:


You seem to be doing this yourself by trying to make Isaiah 42 fit Mohammad.

Muslim-UK said:

As I said elsewhere, John is the least reliable account when trying to know the Historical Jesus pbuh. He writes long discourses and makes no mention of key events that he was supposed to have witnessed, yet makes incredible claims of raising dead people after 4 days, that are not mentioned elsewhere. Extends the Missionary to 3.5 years, gives different reason why the Pharisees wanted to kill Jesus pbuh and even gives a different day for his crucifixion, and don't forget the long discourses that are not found elsewhere.

Your opinion that John is the least valid is noted:

Muslim-UK said:

Luke never met Jesus pbuh and is repeating hearsay.

Jesus pbuh was said to have also said, Matthew 10:15 "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:"

Your opinion the Luke is not valid is noted:

Muslim-UK said:

Yes, shunned by the Disciples and cursed by God, he started his own religion.

Your opinion that Paul is irrelevant is noted:

Muslim-UK said:

When did Jesus pbuh become a mighty man of war? He was mocked and humbled himself, offering the other cheek remember? He was a pacifist, a peaceful man and no warrior.

So you believe Mohammad was a man of God because He was a warrior? Would that be why many (not all) in Islam seek to eradicate Christians?


My friend this one point alone answers the question of this thread.

Muslim-UK said:

Yes, shunned by the Disciples and cursed by God, he started his own religion.

If my lie is spreading the truth of God, why am I judged a sinner. Romans [3:7]

Romans 3:8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.

Paul is not saying the gospel he preached is a lie! Try using just a little discernment and pay attention to the entire context, not pulling one verse out as you did here to try and support a false theory.


Now since you in your own mind have discredited Matthew, the Torah, John, Luke and Paul there is little left of the New Testament. Why do you use it so much? Oh yeah that is only when you can make it fit your purposes.

Muslim-UK said:

2 Corinthians 12:7...

"There was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me."

8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me.

GOD said NO 3 times, so Paul explained it away ...

God did not say no in the text you assume that and insert your interpretation. Verse 9 & 10 show that Paul was delivered by the power of Christ.


2 Timothy 3:11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.

Muslim-UK said:

9 But He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is perfected in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly in my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest on me.

Romans 7:19-24

For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?"

Not sure what point you are trying to make here by my opinion is you have very little understanding of who Paul was and what He taught.

Muslim-UK said:

Looks like Paul for one, disregarded this commandment.

Paul was commanded to go to the Gentiles. Are you trying to make something fit your narrative here?


Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

Muslim-UK said:

What does a human characteristic of getting angry have to do with flaws and the Law of Moses?

You originally brought it up in another post to try and show Jesus’s humanity and lack of divinity

Muslim-UK said:

Could you please show me from the Bible where the villages of Kedar is please.

HTTP>> Isaiah 42:11 Let the wilderness and its towns raise their voices; let the settlements where Kedar lives rejoice. Let the people of Sela sing for joy; let them shout from the mountaintops. villages, nomads, settlements of Kedar. Notice too all the translations in the link clearly refer to Sila as Mountain Tops. Not one opted for lofty, craggy rock, rock stone or stronghold. I think I'll follow what professional Translators used.

Even so this is no support for your theory Mohammad is the topic of Isaiah 42. Remember you hold our scripture in contempt; you can hardly use it to prove your theology. If there is so much error in it why should anyone believe what you say about Isaiah 42?

Muslim-UK said:

Are you sure new song doesn't mean new covenant? Even your Scholars say, yes it does, though they attribute the new order to Jesus pbuh:

Even so Mohammad is not found in the pages of the Holy Bible as a messenger from God! You may try to make it fit but it does not!

 

[Postvieww]

Muslm-UK said:

“ yet makes incredible claims of raising dead people after 4 days, that are not mentioned elsewhere”

That really would prove Jesus was who He claimed to be and who Christians believe Him to be, would it not?


Can you provide any reference to anyone praying to Allah and have a dead person raised. I can provide some examples from the Christian faith apart from scripture.


Even if you have some examples of this happening in Islam what would make them more valid than those of scripture? If you don’t have any reported raisings from the dead I am sure you would not believe any reference I could give you.


Interesting point anyway.



Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

 

[Truth light]

Can you provide any reference to anyone praying to Allah and have a dead person raised.

Jesus

 

[Muslim-UK]

Mecca

Mecca was allegedly the centre of Arabian trading routes before Muhammads time

• Yet there is no archeological corroboration for this. Such a great ancient city would surely have received a mention in ancient history. However, the earliest reference to Mecca as a city is in the Continuato Byzantia Arabica, an 8th century document.

PS This is not your friend Jay Smith.

Not Jay Smith? According to the foot note: (Copyright © 1999 by Peter Saunders based on other content from Jay Smith. Originally posted at Debate.org.uk. Used with permission.)

I have already shown it existed First Century A.D.

Qibla
According to the Quran, the direction of prayer (Qibla) was canonized towards Mecca for all Muslims circa 624 AD, two years after the Hijra (see Sura 2:144, 149-50). Yet the earliest archaeological evidence from mosques built at the beginning of the 8th century suggests their sanctuary was located a long way north of Mecca, closer to the vicinity of Jerusalem.

No evidence is offered only theories. It's a shame Jay doesn't study more:

Encyclopedia of the History of Arabic Science

Encyclopedia of the History of Arabic Science

THE ORIENTATION OF THE FIRST MOSQUES

The Prophet Muhammad had said when he was in Medina: ‘What is between east and west is a qibla’, and he himself had prayed due south to Mecca. In emulation of the Prophet, and interpreting his remark as implying that the qibla was due south everywhere, certain Muslims used south for the qibla wherever they were. When mosques were erected from Andalusia to Central Asia by the first generation of Muslims known as the Companions of the Prophet (sahaba), some of these were built facing south even though this was scarcely appropriate in places far to the east or west of the meridian of Mecca. Certain early mosques from Andalusia to Central Asia bear witness to this. One may compare this situation with the eastern orientation of churches and synagogues.

The first mosque to be built in Egypt was built facing winter sunrise, and it was this direction which remained the most popular throughout the medieval period amongst the religious authorities. Likewise some of the earliest mosques in Iraq were built facing winter sunset. These orientations were chosen so that the mosques would be ‘facing’ specific walls of the Ka’ba (Figure 4.2). Throughout the medieval period, winter sunrise and sunset were favoured in Egypt and Iraq respectively as the qiblat al-sahaba.

FINDING THE QIBLA BY NON-MATHEMATICAL METHODS

Simple practical means for finding the qibla by the sun, moon and stars, and even by the wins, are outlined in a wide variety of medieval texts. The methods advocated in these sources are adapted from the notions under lying the folk-scientific tradition which was widely disseminated in the Muslim world throughout the medieval period. This popular tradition of astronomy and meteorology was ultimately derived from pre-Islamic Arabia, but had been embellished by the indigenous as well as the Hellenistic traditions of folk science which had been practised in the areas overrun by the Muslims in the seventh century. It was quite distinct from the scientific tradition of the Muslim astronomers, but was far more widely known and practised.

Documented for the first time in the early centuries of the Islamic era, this astronomical lore was eventually applied on a popular level to be practical problems of organising the agricultural calendar, regulating the lunar calendar and the religious festivals, reckoning the time of day by shadow lengths and the time of night by the positions of the lunar mansions and, what concerns us here, finding the direction of the qibla by non-mathematical means. Aspects of this scientific folklore are practised in agricultural communities in the Near East to this day.

Unlike the ‘astronomy of the ancients’, the popular scientific tradition relied solely upon observation of natural phenomena such as the sun, moon, stars and winds. As the Qur’an states that these celestial bodies and natural phenomena were created by God, and specifically that men should be guided by the stars, folk astronomy, unlike mathematical astronomy and astrology, was not criticised by legal scholars.

Jay uses the work of amateur christian evangelical Researcher Dan Gibson recent book Qur'anic Geography, which lists a number of unfounded controversial theories.

I wonder when Dan Gibson was ever allowed into Mecca to carry out his archaeological dig or is he simply relying on a google maps app on his iphone?

 

[Postvieww]

Jesus

I haven't watched the video yet, but I will. I can assure you Jesus has never prayed to your Allah and you cannot show anywhere in the Holy Bible that he did.

 

[Muslim-UK]

I haven't watched the video yet, but I will. I can assure you Jesus has never prayed to your Allah and you cannot show anywhere in the Holy Bible that he did.

He certainly didn't call God Yahweh or Jehovah. "Eloh, Eloh, lama sabachthani?"
The Aramaic Name for God - Elah <<< As you won't accept Sheikh Ahmad Deedat, may Allah swt be pleased with him, Go and listen to a Hebrew speaker saying it out aloud.

 

[Muslim-UK]

That really would prove Jesus was who He claimed to be and who Christians believe Him to be, would it not?

Or as Scholars say, works of fantasy dreamt up by a non Jewish writer(s), living decades after the event writing in perfect Greek, and very well versed in pagan myths of old. The long speeches he attributes to Jesus are as if he was standing in front of a mirror and talking for the various characters we read about :/

Even Church leaders are reading these books, though of course they all know the truth, but I guess it pays the bills

John Shelby Spong, a retired American bishop of the Anglican Church in America, decided to present his findings to the public in his book The Fourth Gospel: Tales of a Jewish Mystic, and one of the most controversial topics he covers is that of miracles. “Not one of the signs (the Fourth Gospel’s word for miracles) recorded in this book was, in all probability, something that actually happened,” he says in a Huffington Post article, adding, “this means that Jesus never changed water into wine, fed a multitude with five loaves and two fish or raised Lazarus from the dead.” This would cast doubt on the notion of the superhuman Jesus that so many people learned about in Sunday school.

The Allegory
As well as challenging the reality of miracles (and hence Jesus’s god-like status), Spong questions the veracity of the authors, as well as the words of Jesus. It the same article, he argues that “[t]here is no way that the Fourth Gospel was written by John Zebedee or by any of the disciples of Jesus” and that “[t]he author of this book is not a single individual, but is at least three different writers/editors, who did their layered work over a period of 25 to 30 years.” But he does not stop there, also challenging the veracity of Jesus’s words: “There is probably not a single word attributed to Jesus in this book that the Jesus of history actually spoke. This includes all the ‘I Am’ sayings and all of the ‘Farewell Discourses.’” If John Zebadee did not write the Gospel of John, who did? Who put words into Jesus’ mouth, and how should Universal Life Church ministers treat these passages?

( » The Fourth Gospel: Tales of a Jewish Mystic) johnshelbyspong.com

 

[Limo]

Salam,
I noticed that too. Interesting direction to take, one I don't share, but interesting to follow along none the less. ja zak Allah khairen

Walikom Alsalm
I know it's a new direction. I built it after reading to modern western Christian scholars.
They've reached a convenient point that Jesus-Christ as defined by the Church doesn't exist. It's comply with Islamic view of Al-Masseh as totally different characteristic that we can't group both characters together again.
So, they and I'm totaly agree with them we've Massiac-Christinty (true follower of Al-Masseh) and Pauline-Christinty (true follower of Jesus-Christ) another religion started by Paul
I hope I can spread the knowledge among Muslims.
Regards