Muslims claim neither Jesus nor the New Testament ever claim Jesus as God- are they correct?

Sword of the Lord said:

A violent group of murderers, pedophiles, and mutilators, whose ideology came into existence 600 years after Christ, does not get to interpret the Bible.

Click to expand...

Amen. I do not trust their ideology or opinions at all.

Sword of the Lord said:

A violent group of murderers, pedophiles, and mutilators, whose ideology came into existence 600 years after Christ, does not get to interpret the Bible

Click to expand...

As a Christian, I assume that you, like myself, want to see all Muslims come to Christ. There are currently more than 2 billion Muslims who are living without a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. Rather than slander them, let us instead pray that the Holy Spirit will lead these Muslims to the Truth that is found only in Jesus Christ and also pray for believers throughout the world to be emboldened by the Holy Spirit in taking opportunities to share the Gospel and the love of Christ with their Muslim friends and neighbors.

Sword of the Lord said:

A violent group of murderers, pedophiles, and mutilators, whose ideology came into existence 600 years after Christ, does not get to interpret the Bible.

Click to expand...

That may be true, but if you are in a Muslim majority country, that statement could cost you your life

JosephZ said:

I think there's been a misunderstanding as to what I was saying when I said marriage had little to do with religion well into the Middle Ages. What I meant is that in the past, marriages were carried out more as a necessity than out of love and/or companionship. It was usually a contractual arrangement between parents, clans, or tribes to form a strategic alliance of some sort. Some examples would be to maintain pure blood lines, legitimize children, determine heirs, protect property rights, maintain or bring about peace, etc. Any religious ceremonies that would have taken place would have only been held by those who could afford them and only as a formality. The marriage was legally binding at the time of being betrothed, regardless of age or whether or not a religious ceremony was performed.

For much of the history of the Catholic Church, no specific ritual was therefore prescribed for celebrating a marriage – at least not until the late medieval period: "Marriage vows did not have to be exchanged in a church, nor was a priest's presence required. A couple could exchange consent anywhere, anytime."

Marriage, Sex, and Civic Culture in Late Medieval London

Awarded honorable mention for the 2007 Wallace K. Ferguson Prize sponsored by the Canadian Historical AssociationHow were marital and sexual relationships woven into the fabric of late medieval society, and what form did these relationships take? Using extensive documentary evidence from both...

books.google.com

Click to expand...

Marriages were arraigned to prevent inbreeding. The Church long ago prohibited 1st and 2nd cousins from marrying and still
do.

Marriages were arraigned out of necessity to ensure that the couple were not of the same bloodline. The marriage was known
within the tribe or village and eventually documented, as time went by and populations grew. Love was often involved between the couple before and even after the marriage took place. Males usually sought the blessing of the female's father in order to marry her.

Humans are not being bred like dogs and cats, where bloodlines are kept pure in order to maintain a pedigree. Freak children could result among couples if their blood relationship was too close and being that homogenous societies were more common than here in the US, it was an important desire to keep couples who were related from marrying. Marriage is more than just a ceremony, but
a union of the man and woman with the primary purpose of procreation. However, the ceremony of marriage, or union, goes far back
before Christianity existed.

Also, throughout the world, males had to show the father and the potential wife, that they could be good providers. Males were generally well established both economically and socially. This has been true going back to Adam and Eve.

boughtwithaprice said:

That may be true, but if you are in a Muslim majority country, that statement could cost you your life

Click to expand...

The martyrs crown for a much better bigger cause than suicidal murder of innocent people.
They have been so twisted

JimR-OCDS said:

Marriages were arraigned to prevent inbreeding. The Church long ago prohibited 1st and 2nd cousins from marrying and still
do.

Marriages were arraigned out of necessity to ensure that the couple were not of the same bloodline.

Humans are not being bred like dogs and cats, where bloodlines are kept pure in order to maintain a pedigree. Freak children could result among couples if their blood relationship was too close and being that homogenous societies were more common than here in the US, it was an important desire to keep couples who were related from marrying.

Click to expand...

The Habsburg dynasty (also known as the House of Austria) was one of the most important sovereign dynasties of Europe and had two main branches: the Austrian and the Spanish Habsburgs. As a consequence of the matrimonial policy conducted by the dynasty to establish political alliances through marriage, an important number of consanguineous marriages such as uncle-niece and first-cousins were contracted by the Habsburgs. Some of those unions were marriages between members of the own dynasty in order to keep their heritage in their own hands and other consanguineous unions were marriages with members of related dynasties. The consequences of the prolonged consanguineous marriage have been investigated for the Spanish branch of the Habsburg dynasty. It was demonstrated that the inbreeding effects such as inbreeding depression for survival played a major role in the extinction of the Spanish Habsburg lineage at the end of the 17th century.

A total number of 73 marriages were contracted by the Holy Roman Emperors and the Spanish Habsburg kings, their children and their grandchildren, in the period of 300 years from 1450 to 1750. The children of Habsburg women married to individuals of other different dynasties did not belong to the Habsburg dynasty and therefore these individuals were not considered for the kinship analysis. Many of the Habsburg marriages were consanguineous unions. Thus, there were four uncle-niece marriages (Philip II of Spain with his niece Anna of Habsburg, Archduke Charles of Habsburg with Marie of Bavaria, Philip IV of Spain with Marianna of Habsburg and Leopold I of Habsburg with Margaret of Spain, as shown in Figure 1), two double first cousins, nine first cousins, four first cousins once removed (marriage of an individual with the offspring of his/her first cousin), one quadruple second cousins, seven second cousins and many other marriages with more remote kinship.

Royal dynasties as human inbreeding laboratories: the Habsburgs

The struggle for peoples’ souls – the Habsburgs and the Counter-Reformation

Royals wanted their bloodlines to be pure.

Maintaining pure bloodlines doesn't always involve blood relatives, it can also include people of the same ethnicity, the same culture and same traditions.

JimR-OCDS said:

Marriage is more than just a ceremony, but a union of the man and woman with the primary purpose of procreation. However, the ceremony of marriage, or union, goes far back before Christianity existed.

Click to expand...

The basic mechanics of arranged marriage have not changed too much over the years. However, the practice has become less rigid over time. Arranged marriages were common as far back as Biblical times and beyond.

The traditional purposes of these types of unions were political, military, and social. They were commonplace among the royalty and nobility around the world. In ancient Egypt, for example, one of the chief goals of arranged marriage was to keep royal bloodlines pure.

JosephZ said:

The Habsburg dynasty (also known as the House of Austria) was one of the most important sovereign dynasties of Europe and had two main branches: the Austrian and the Spanish Habsburgs. As a consequence of the matrimonial policy conducted by the dynasty to establish political alliances through marriage, an important number of consanguineous marriages such as uncle-niece and first-cousins were contracted by the Habsburgs. Some of those unions were marriages between members of the own dynasty in order to keep their heritage in their own hands and other consanguineous unions were marriages with members of related dynasties. The consequences of the prolonged consanguineous marriage have been investigated for the Spanish branch of the Habsburg dynasty. It was demonstrated that the inbreeding effects such as inbreeding depression for survival played a major role in the extinction of the Spanish Habsburg lineage at the end of the 17th century.

A total number of 73 marriages were contracted by the Holy Roman Emperors and the Spanish Habsburg kings, their children and their grandchildren, in the period of 300 years from 1450 to 1750. The children of Habsburg women married to individuals of other different dynasties did not belong to the Habsburg dynasty and therefore these individuals were not considered for the kinship analysis. Many of the Habsburg marriages were consanguineous unions. Thus, there were four uncle-niece marriages (Philip II of Spain with his niece Anna of Habsburg, Archduke Charles of Habsburg with Marie of Bavaria, Philip IV of Spain with Marianna of Habsburg and Leopold I of Habsburg with Margaret of Spain, as shown in Figure 1), two double first cousins, nine first cousins, four first cousins once removed (marriage of an individual with the offspring of his/her first cousin), one quadruple second cousins, seven second cousins and many other marriages with more remote kinship.

Royal dynasties as human inbreeding laboratories: the Habsburgs

The struggle for peoples’ souls – the Habsburgs and the Counter-Reformation

Royals wanted their bloodlines to be pure.

Maintaining pure bloodlines doesn't always involve blood relatives, it can also include people of the same ethnicity, the same culture and same traditions.


The basic mechanics of arranged marriage have not changed too much over the years. However, the practice has become less rigid over time. Arranged marriages were common as far back as Biblical times and beyond.

The traditional purposes of these types of unions were political, military, and social. They were commonplace among the royalty and nobility around the world. In ancient Egypt, for example, one of the chief goals of arranged marriage was to keep royal bloodlines pure.

https://owlcation.com/social-sciences/Arranged-Marriages-Past-and-Present

Click to expand...

Again, you're referring to noble class families, who were the minority and not the majority.

The average marriages were not used for political gain is among the nobles.

JimR-OCDS said:

Again, you're referring to noble class families, who were the minority and not the majority.

Click to expand...

Yes, this was in response to your claim that marriages were arraigned to prevent inbreeding and the Church prohibiting 1st and 2nd cousins from marrying. I gave an example showing, that despite the Church prohibiting cousins from marrying, these marraiges still took place. In the case of the Habsburg Dynasty, the Church actually sanctioned uncle-niece marriages, first cousin, and second cousin marriages. This also occured in other royal families and dynasties as well.

JimR-OCDS said:

The average marriages were not used for political gain is among the nobles.

Click to expand...

True, but inheritance and succession were also important to many commoner and peasant families, just on a much smaller scale. Marriages among commoner and peasants were also used to put an end to a conflict between families or clans, gain a higher status in the community, and to preserve culture and tradition.

JosephZ said:

Yes, this was in response to your claim that marriages were arraigned to prevent inbreeding and the Church prohibiting 1st and 2nd cousins from marrying. I gave an example showing, that despite the Church prohibiting cousins from marrying, these marraiges still took place. In the case of the Habsburg Dynasty, the Church actually sanctioned uncle-niece marriages, first cousin, and second cousin marriages. This also occured in other royal families and dynasties as well.


True, but inheritance and succession were also important to many commoner and peasant families, just on a much smaller scale. Marriages among commoner and peasants were also used to put an end to a conflict between families or clans, gain a higher status in the community, and to preserve culture and tradition.

Click to expand...

The first and upmost priority in marriage was to prevent inbreeding. It's why the parents of the bride and groom, sought
to ensure that the two were not related.

Inheritance was important among the peasant class, but not as important as preventing inbreeding.
It's why a male had to have both financial and social status to attract a female in the first place.
One a girl chose a potential mate, the father then looked at the other qualifications for his daughter.

Sure, there were some who married off their daughters just to get rid of them, but they are rare. Some
also sold their children into slavery just to get rid of them. But what's the point?

Marriage existed and the Jews had rituals to follow in the betrothal and marriage of a couple.

The United States was actually founded on the Jewish Republic as in the Exodus story. Many
think it had to do with the Aristotal and many today look at the French Revolution as being
the optimum for liberty. The problem is that the French Revolution only lasted 10 years and
the dictator Napolean took over. The French Revolution was closer to atheism than to anything
the Founding Father's of the US had in mind.