the name of Mohammad in the Old testament

[Albion]

First Mohammad was mentioned in the bible:

https://www.islamicity.com/Mosque/Muhammad_Bible.HTM

Having read the link, I can say with certainty that Mohammad is NOT mentioned in the Bible. You may say that there are references to someone whom you take to be him, but other people can just as easily think it's someone else.

 

[Jadis40]

You are right, you can show people as much as you like, but ultimately they can choose to ignore and keep on ignoring until their life expires on the Earth. Jews have taken exactly the same position with regards to Jesus pbuh.

I praise GOD for allowing me to follow Islam, the only Religion that accepts ALL the Prophets and Messengers of Allah swt.
Jesus pbuh said, he had yet many things to say, but the people would have to wait for a Prophet of Truth to come, and he would explain all things as directed by Allah swt.

You're quoting Jesus wrong. Jesus promised that he would send the comforter. He and the Heavenly Father fulfilled that promise with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. It does not and never will refer to Mohammad. The comforter is the Holy Spirit.

John 14:26

 

[Muslim-UK]

Do you believe that God could not choose to become a man?

The Creator is above becoming his creation. The Earth is a mere speck within our Solar System, which in turn is a mere speck compared to some other Solar Systems, and this is just within he First known Heaven, and there's 7 in total. He knows us better than we know ourselves, never mind having to become a mere man to understand us.

 

[Albion]

He knows us better than we know ourselves, never mind having to become a mere man to understand us.

The point (in part) was that we could know him, not that he could know us (which of course he does).

 

[Muslim-UK]

You're quoting Jesus wrong. Jesus promised that he would send the comforter. He and the Heavenly Father fulfilled that promise with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. It does not and never will refer to Mohammad. The comforter is the Holy Spirit.

John 14:26

Is this how all Christians understood it?
Where is the additional information given that laid out the 'many things' that were to be explained?

 

[Jadis40]

The Creator is above becoming his creation. The Earth is a mere speck within our Solar System, which in turn is a mere speck compared to some other Solar Systems, and this is just within he First known Heaven, and there's 7 in total. He knows us better than we know ourselves, never mind having to become a mere man to understand us.

Except that's exactly what happened. Jesus was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and was born to Mary around 2000 years ago. In that moment, the creator of the heavens and the earth entered the world in the form of a babe in a cattle stall in Bethlehem.

 

[Albion]

Is this how all Christians understood it?

Essentially so, yes. See John 14:26

 

[Muslim-UK]

The point (in part) was that we could know him, not that he could know us (which of course he does).

I see, like people meeting Krishna or Brahma for example?
Similar meetings took place within Egyptian and Greek Mythology.

Mind you the GOD of Abraham pbuh is never recorded to have become a man for his 'creation' to get to know Him, and that worked perfectly well for Thousands of years. In fact He says, He is unlike his creation, and would never become a man with weaknesses.

When the Muslim descendants of Ishmael pbuh were made a Great Nation as promised in the OT, GOD communicated to the Prophet using his trusted Angels, so it seems the Christian need for a human God is abnormal if we look back at History.

 

[Muslim-UK]

Except that's exactly what happened. Jesus was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and was born to Mary around 2000 years ago. In that moment, the creator of the heavens and the earth entered the world in the form of a babe in a cattle stall in Bethlehem.

He was a Prophet born miraculously as a sign for the people. Of himself he could do Nothing, and God did miracles and wonders through him, using him a vessel just like Moses pbuh and previous Prophets.

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

 

[Albion]

I see, like people meeting Krishna or Brahma for example?

DID anyone meet Krishna or Buddha?

Mind you the GOD of Abraham pbuh is never recorded to have become a man for his 'creation' to get to know Him, and that worked perfectly well for Thousands of years. In fact He says, He is unlike his creation, and would never become a man with weaknesses.

The man you follow wasn't part of Allah's plan until even later, so I don't think this point about timing means anything.

 

[Albion]

You only answered part of the question. Where's the revelation received explaining the many things?

The "many things" are not itemized. The assurance is that the Holy Ghost will lead the people into all truth. It's a guarantee that God will remain with his church after the Lord, Jesus, returns to heaven.

A "Spirit" in the New Testament is a human Prophet.

It can be a reference to a human, not necessarily a prophet.

John (chapters 14 to 16), Jesus speaks about the coming of the “Spirit of Truth” or “Advocate” (in Greek, parakletos).

John 14:16-17 and 14:26 are clearly about the promise of the Holy Spirit: in John 14:16-17, the Advocate or Spirit of Truth is spoken of as an everlasting, invisible, abiding, inner presence; in most manuscripts, this Advocate is even directly called “the Holy Spirit” in John 14:26.

But as Jesus’ farewell discourse proceeds these titles become multivalent and, in John 15:26-27 and 16:7-15, they begin to refer more to a future prophet than to the Holy Spirit.

Right. The Holy Ghost.

 

[Albion]

That's not what Jesus pbuh said

Yes, actually he did say that.

What has the Holy Spirit spoken, what has it explained?

The church, the faith, has endured and prospered; therefore we see the hand of God in this history.

1 John 4:1-6, in between these mentions of the Holy Spirit, the author speaks at length about testing the spirits. In these verses the word “Spirit” is used to talk about prophets and how to tell whether they are true or false"

Yes. There's a difference between "spirits," "spirit," and the "Holy Spirit."

 

[Albion]

How do you test the Spirits if they are not human?

Test what the spirits stand for or promote.

What's that got to do with having many things explained?

You think that there has to be a checklist. I said that the evidence of the Holy Ghost staying with the church and guiding it is in the durability and success of the church for 2000 years.

There are thousands of different Churches each claiming to understand what the Holy Spirit communicated. This is irrelevant to what Jesus pbuh said, I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of Truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own, but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come, and “he will take what is mine and declare it to you.”

That's what I was referring to. The church has made many decisions along the way; that the faith is intact and growing and influential shows that he's been with the people through it all. Had the faith failed, like Zoroastrianism or some other religions, THAT would have disproved the point.

The clear distinction is that the Spirit of Truth in John 16 is predicted to declare new revelations

I don't think so.

 

[Albion]

You are mixing the Holy Ghost which is said to strengthen the followers with the Spirit of Truth, a Prophet to come and explain many things just as Jesus pbuh said. Put forward some names and let's examine their claims.

I did say, didn't I, that "spirit,""spirits,"and the "Holy Spirit" have different meanings.

Sorry that's not right. For 1,000 years the average member of the Public was banned from owning a Bible, and since it's been translated into English, the Church has seen a steady decline in numbers. In fact most of Europe is Christian in name alone. By 2050 America will be mainly Atheist too.

No, while it's true that some areas are probably now to be considered post-Christian, that has been more than made up for by growth in the southern hemisphere, particularly in Africa.

Christianity is still waiting for many things to be explained. For example, should Christians set up a Nation built on the teachings of Jesus pbuh, if so what would such a State look like?

There's no reason to think that this should be done, so it doesn't follow that we need to be listening for instructions on how to do it. You are positing developments that are from your own speculation. Christianity doesn't have that perspective, so it's not something to insist upon in questions or statements directed at us.

 

[Muslim-UK]

I did say, didn't I, that "spirit,""spirits,"and the "Holy Spirit" have different meanings.

Spirit of truth is what we are concerned with here, and as shown it can mean Prophet.

No, while it's true that some areas are probably now to be considered post-Christian, that has been more than made up for by growth in the southern hemisphere, particularly in Africa.

That's great to hear. Missionaries do a great job of handing out aid with one hand and a Bible with the other. They do the same thing in India, with some people reporting aid is withheld unless the recipient accepts the blood of a innocent human for atonement.

All I can say is, let's hope the Internet access comes to them asap, though to be honest, deep down they believe in reincarnation as a back up plan :/

There's no reason to think that this should be done, so it doesn't follow that we need to be listening for instructions on how to do it. You are positing developments that are from your own speculation. Christianity doesn't have that perspective, so it's not something to insist upon in questions or statements directed at us.

You have yet to show a single thing given to you by the 'Spirit of truth'.

'I have many things to tell you' <<<<Name one and explain who said it and how was it tested to see if it came from GOD or not.

 

[Albion]

You have yet to show a single thing given to you by the 'Spirit of truth'.

I think this kind of questioning is out of bounds. I have said that the churches have made many, in fact innumerable, decisions since the beginning of the Christian era. That includes the codification of the Bible, the resolution of various doctrinal problems though the Ecumenical Councils, and so on. ALL OF THAT we believe took place under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. To "name one" as though we are running down a list of prophesies is really not what this is all about.

 

[Mediaeval]

The only ones filled with doubt and fear are Christians. This board and Hundreds like it on the Web, has plenty of pages filled with doubts on whether people are saved etc.

If salvation really came from sinless human sacrifices, then why condemn the pagans of old who used to offer up sinless children?

The jars of clay didn't contain a single book from the NT, and copies of copies of copies of copies largely go back to the 4th Century, which is more than 250 years of editing.


There were plenty of Jesus' followers who sought forgiveness from GOD alone, and did not call upon a mere mortal.

James D.G. Dunn authored the important and accessible book, Did the First Christians Worship Jesus?: The New Testament Evidence (WJK, 2010, 176 pp., paperback). He is a leading New Testament scholar and generally regarded as the world’s foremost authority on Christology. That’s mostly due to his more dense book, Christology in the Making (1980/1996).

is a rather provocative book for a moderately-conservative, evangelical scholar of Dunn’s stature. In his previous books, he has embraced the traditional view that Jesus is God and God is triune. So, Dunn accepts the idea of a later, developed, high Christology, endorsing the classical doctrine of Incarnation—that God became the man Jesus. But Dunn doesn’t think the earliest Christians believed that. Did the First Christians Worship Jesus?

He says, “Did the first Christians worship Jesus?… No, by and large the first Christians did not worship Jesus as such” (p. 150). He adds, “So our central question can indeed be answered negatively, and perhaps it should be” (151). Dunn earlier says of Jesus, “He was not to be worshipped as wholly God or fully identified with God…. only God, only the one God, is to be worshipped” (146).

In chapter one, Dunn explores Bible words usually translated “worship.” He says both the Hebrew shachah and the Greek proskuneo refer mostly to the physical act of bowing down either as prostration or genuflection. He cites Bible reports of people doing such acts toward some object, such as God, a human superior, such as a king, or Jesus. Regarding our English word “worship,” which conveys an attitude and therefore not an act, Dunn observes of the New Testament (NT), “Christian tradition envisaged different grades or degrees of worship” (18). He concludes, “Cultic worship and service (latreuein, latreia) as such is never offered to Christ, and other worship terms are used only in relation to God … the most common words for praise and thanksgiving (eucharistein), they too are never offered to Christ” (27).

It's good to see more and more Christian Scholars confirming Bible corruption and affirming Jesus pbuh was not God, not that he ever claimed to be, unless you want to count on ambiguous statements likely put into his mouth by later Greek Theologians who wrote the Gospel of John.

When we leave fictitious and oppressive worldviews like Islam behind and finally face reality, it can be scary. One of the most frequent commands in the Bible, however, is, Fear not. At the same time, different people are at different stages in their spiritual journey. Some are weak in faith, some are strong, some are well-informed, some are not yet well-informed enough. The solution is a better understanding of the Gospel, more treasure in the jar of clay, for only the good news of God’s perfect love casts out fear. Making sure we enter the bathroom with the left foot and other such absurd practices will neither remove pride and selfishness from the heart, nor quiet the conscience, nor assure us of Divine forgiveness.

The pagans of old who offered sacrifices to their gods, who were uni-personal just like the Islamic Allah, were trying to earn divine favor with their performances. How grievous are the consequences of such a wrong notion! Divine favor and love cannot be earned. Otherwise grace is no longer grace. If a man offered for love all the wealth of his house, he would be utterly despised. This is true in the case of human love as well as Divine. Meanwhile, the difference should be obvious between a noble self-sacrifice offered out of love and sacrificing something weaker than oneself to buy someone’s love.

Latreia is for the Lord alone, and the Son is the Lord and was and is therefore rightly worshipped, and this according to a more "significant and accessible" volume, the Bible, which God, being a faithful Father, has well and faithfully preserved for His children’s guidance. In the words of an early liturgy, “To Thee [God the Father] belong the glory, praise, majesty, worship, and adoration, and to Thy Son Jesus, Thy Christ, our Lord and God and King, and to the Holy Spirit, now and always, forever and ever. Amen.”

Your concept of God is not only inferior to the Biblical concept of God in terms of love, but also in terms of goodness and faithfulness. To return to our analogy, does a good and faithful mother (A) deny her children guidance or (B) provide the necessary guidance to the best of her ability? Christians sing with King David the psalmist that the Lord is our shepherd and we shall not want, which means we shall lack no good thing, and that includes God's word. A mother who did not provide for her children would likewise be considered a bad, yea abusive, mother. So therefore we should conclude that the Islamic Allah is likewise bad and abusive.

Ironically, both the Quran and Muslim scholars affirm the integrity of the Bible, however desperately you may deny it. Islam just can't win. If a Muslim denies the Bible, then he denies what the Quran says about the Bible. But if he agrees with the Quran and affirms the Bible, then the Bible contradicts the Quran and exposes it as the fraud of a false prophet, and Islam remains untenable yet again.

 

[Albion]

So the Spirit is able to deceive by including into Canon forged texts.
It looks like Jesus pbuh left you in limbo.

As I said earlier, what non-Christians have been told about Christianity isn't really my concern. I've answered what might help you, but I am not about to rebut in detail every myth, fantasy, and misperception about the religion that others have picked up somewhere or other. Nor, for that matter, does this forum exist so that non-Christians can take potshots at Christianity.

 

[Muslim-UK]

Meanwhile, the difference should be obvious between a noble self-sacrifice offered out of love and sacrificing something weaker than oneself to buy someone’s love.

How is staying up all night praying to be saved from crucifixion whilst sweating blood considered noble?! The poor man was terrified and unwilling. Imagine a murderer being sentenced and being told by the Judge, he's free to go, then asking the guards to drag his own son in kicking and screaming to carry the capital punishment. :/

Your concept of God is not only inferior to the Biblical concept of God in terms of love, but also in terms of goodness and faithfulness. To return to our analogy, does a good and faithful mother (A) deny her children guidance or (B) provide the necessary guidance to the best of her ability? Christians sing with King David the psalmist that the Lord is our shepherd and we shall not want, which means we shall lack no good thing, and that includes God's word. A mother who did not provide for her children would likewise be considered a bad, yea abusive, mother. So therefore we should conclude that the Islamic Allah is likewise bad and abusive.

What's abusive and flawed is a Mother who insists her children bath in the innocent blood of a human being for atonement or looks a the following diagram and explains John, Jim and Bill are really One person :/

Ironically, both the Quran and Muslim scholars affirm the integrity of the Bible, however desperately you may deny it. Islam just can't win. If a Muslim denies the Bible, then he denies what the Quran says about the Bible. But if he agrees with the Quran and affirms the Bible, then the Bible contradicts the Quran and exposes it as the fraud of a false prophet, and Islam remains untenable yet again.

No where does the Qur'an confirm integrity of the Bible, and as your own Scholars have confirmed time and time again, it is heavily corrupted and unreliable.

 

[Robban]

What Christian Scholars themselves say should be your concern, especially if you actually believe there is a life after death. The evidence of being mislead by the Holy Spirit is evident in your Bible. Which one is the correct bible to read from; 66 or 73 or 81 books?

On forgeries:
A frail man sits in chains inside a dank, cold prison cell. He has escaped death before but now realizes that his execution is drawing near.

“I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come,” the man –the Apostle Paul - says in the Bible's 2 Timothy. “I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith.”

The passage is one of the most dramatic scenes in the New Testament. Paul, the most prolific New Testament author, is saying goodbye from a Roman prison cell before being beheaded. His goodbye veers from loneliness to defiance and, finally, to joy.

There’s one just one problem - Paul didn’t write those words. In fact, virtually half the New Testament was written by impostors taking on the names of apostles like Paul. At least according to Bart D. Ehrman, a renowned biblical scholar, who makes the charges in his new book “Forged.”

“There were a lot of people in the ancient world who thought that lying could serve a greater good,” says Ehrman, an expert on ancient biblical manuscripts.In “Forged,” Ehrman claims that:

* At least 11 of the 27 New Testament books are forgeries.

* The New Testament books attributed to Jesus’ disciples could not have been written by them because they were illiterate.

* Many of the New Testament’s forgeries were manufactured by early Christian leaders trying to settle theological feuds.

Half of New Testament forged, Bible scholar says

This is a debate section, you could always go to the Christian only section if it's not to your liking. Muslims keep it fair and don't use low life insults or suggest people go and kill themselves, which one Christian suggested on this board.

I think there was a special debate section created not so long ago.

I was under the impression this sub forum was for sharing, learning and friendship in general.

Though I may be wrong.