For Christians who say that they know God

[Jefell]

Heck I am still trying to understand the "trinity"

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7301432
Is belief in the Trinity necessary for Salvation?

You are a Father
You are a Son
You are an Everlasting Spirit

You are made in the Image of GOD.


With Love,
- Jefell

 

[hamba2han]

Could you tell me how this affects the plan of salvation prepared for those who choose Christ as Saviour? Thank you.

Well, I would say that the good news for Christians is that since the prophecy of both Deuteronomy 33:1-2 and Jude 1:14-15 about the coming of "ten thousands of saints" have indeed been fulfilled, this certainly goes a long way towards proving yet again the truth of the Bible.

And when you examine both the Qur'an and the Bible, you will see that the Bible does NOT at all contradict the Qur'an.. except in the instances where the Bible contradicts itself.

As with most things in life, we need to follow where the evidence takes us in our search for the true path to salvation.

And considering that what at stake is nothing less than our eternal fate in the Hereafter, then I really cannot imagine wanting to follow a plan of salvation that BOTH my heart and my head cannot agree on.

 

[Jefell]

Moses received the 'fiery law' in Mount Sinai just as Muhammad (pbuh) received the revelation from God in the mountain of Paran.

It all adds up.

muhammad never knew GOD.. never heard from GOD and GOD never heard from muhammad.
muhammd was too busy trying to build a legacy for muhammad.


Also, Our beloved Moses never made it to the promise land.

Dt 32:48-52 On that same day the LORD told Moses, "Go up into the Abarim Range to Mount Nebo in Moab, across from Jericho, and view Canaan, the land I am giving the Israelites as their own possession. There on the mountain that you have climbed you will die and be gathered to your people, just as your brother Aaron died on Mount Hor and was gathered to his people. This is because both of you broke faith with me in the presence of the Israelites at the waters of Meribah Kadesh in the Desert of Zin and because you did not uphold my holiness among the Israelites. Therefore, you will see the land only from a distance; you will not enter the land I am giving to the people of Israel."


What is muhammad's punishment? ... its coming.

The wicked follow the wicked.. it makes them feel better about being wicked.

If you loved truth .. you would follow the truth.. Jesus is the Truth.

Jesus gonna be here soon.


With Love,
- Jefell

 

[ahmid]

Can you kindly inform who are the "ten thousands of saints" who came (or will come?) with the Lord as prophesied in the following verses of the New Testament:

"Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him." .. (Jude 1:14-15)

Such is the importance and significance of their status in the eyes of God Almighty, I would say that if you do not know who these ten thousand saints/holy ones are, then this would certainly imply that you also would really not know who the Lord is.

Hello Hamba, peace. You recommended this read..."Muhammad had come to Mekkah not to persecute the Quraysh but to abolish the religion which had failed them. ...he rode round the Ka'aba seven times, touching the black stone each time andcrying 'al-Llahu Akbar!' The shout was taken up by his 10,000 soldiers and soon the whole city resounded with words that symbolished the final victory of Islam." Remember that the first struggle with the Quraish failed...if Muhammad was a true prophet, he would not have prophesied victory and then fail. There is no getting around this one.

With regards to Jude, he actually cites a verse from the book of Enoch, 1:9 http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/ot/pseudo/enoch.htm. This is a writing from supposedly 150 BC and could have been an oral talmud or mishnah. Reading this book, you will find the context for "ten thousand saints". If you read the book further, you will find the story of fallen angels...a group that meddled with mankind...likely the same group as in Gen 6:4. I thought this group could be the same plural 'we' of the Qur'an.

----------------------------------------------------
Even as Paul thru Jesus Christ convinced idol worshiping infidels in the first century; likewise do I move about Breaking the Sword of Islam. For the true G*d so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whosoever believes in Him, should not perish but have everlasting life. I will love G*d and my neighbor. By Jesus Christ, all evil is bound from hindering. --- Ahmid Truth
G*d thru Christ bless Zakaria Botros - today he is reaching up to 50 million Muslims in the middle east through televised evangelism via satellite. Reportedly hundreds a week are turning to Christ and abandoning Islam... Hallelujah. 3lotus.com

Help Stop Islam! ...over 12,000 selfish murders since 9/11 ... Islam Kills

 

[Disippelen]

My understanding is that the exact location of Mount Sinai and Mount Paran has not been firmly established by bible scholars.

In fact, the writings of BASE Institute, though not without its controversies, may point to Mount Paran and Sinai in Midian.

Yes, I see Mulia

btw, if Paran is in Saudi Arabia, not Egypt, do you think it would be 'easier' for Hagar to travel?

Well, it highly depends on what part of SA we're talking about. It's a geographical fact that the northernmost part of SA, on the Jordani border is as close to Canaan-Israel as the Sinai Peninsula.

But if you want to use a SA-positioning of Paran in order to support the Islamic claims about Hagar's journey going to Mekka, I believe that we both understand that it's not sufficient. Even if Paran was in northern SA, it would still be a massive distance to Mekka. As such, the Biblical claims still stand against the Islamic alternative (even if Paran was in SA).


Best,
Disippelen

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Greetings. I just saw this thread on another board concerning a Muslim convert to Roman Catholicism and wonder how Muslims view this [I won't post the whole article]....Thanks.....

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7303594
Christian (Magdi) Allam tells Pope: Extremism and Terrorism are 'Mature Fruits' of ..

The Catholic Convert tells the Pope who Baptized him that Islamic extremism and terrorism are the mature fruit of following "the sayings of the Quran and the thought and action of Mohammed"

BROOKLYN, N.Y. (The Deacons Bench) -

You probably remember the Muslim Who Became A Catholic earlier this year, when baptized by Pope Benedict during the Easter Vigil.He hasn't forgotten his Muslim roots, and is speaking out:

"The Muslim-born journalist baptized by Pope Benedict XVI at Easter asked the pope to tell his top aide for relations with Muslims that Islam is not an intrinsically good religion and that Islamic terrorism is not the result of a minority gone astray.

As the Vatican was preparing to host the first meeting of the Catholic-Muslim Forum Nov. 4-6, Magdi Allam, a longtime critic of the Muslim faith of his parents, issued an open letter to Pope Benedict that included criticism of Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. ........
​

 

[Fuzzy]

What do you gain by following a set of rules laid down by the government where you reside? Freedom? Or, is freedom really free?

I get to continue in my personal status quo, which has a great deal of freedom, in defined terms.

We do not do it in hopes of gaining salvation.. we already have salvation. For GOD so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have Everlasting Life.

Good luck with eternity

 

[Islam_mulia]

Hi,

The above would be all well and good if you can provide Hebraic/Jewish sources to prove that 'Adonai' is used as a metaphor in Deut 33:2. An "ask the Rabbi" site or Jewish site may gladly help you out in the same way that a non Muslim can ask an "Islamic scholar". You can start with this website here.

The website you referred to is about the sacredness of the name of G-d and the prohibition of misusing G-d's name. That is good and applies to Islam and Muslims as well.

Like Secundulus, you have difficulty understanding what I meant by mataphors. I am not saying that G-d = Moses or Muhammad, which is outright blasphemy. What I am saying is that while Moses (and Muhammad) were significant in receiving the 'fiery law' in Sinai and Paran, it was G-d who actually wills and effected the event.

If you are a fan of soccer, you will probably understand why Maradona claimed it was the 'Hand of God' that won the cup for Argentina. That is metaphor.

You may want to ask why "The Lord came from Sinai and shone forth from Seir to them; He appeared from Mount Paran...."

1. What is the significance of mentioning Sinai, Seir and Mount Paran? Why Mount Paran? I thought Moses receive teh Torah at Sinai?

2. Please show me where Jews would object if I say "the Lord came from Sinai..." to imply that Moses receive the Torah from G-d at Sinai.

Again for "tens of thousand" show me the Hebrew in Deut 33:2 which categorically states "tens of thousands", please since the closer translation into English is "myriad". Please see here for the source.

As I mentioned earlier, the Septuagint and many Bible translate that as 'ten thousands'.

If I use "ten thousand" it would not mean I am wrong as the number is also considered as "myriad". More importantly, I use "ten thousands" because from a historical context, the "ten thousand" is more significant to the actual event that happened in Paran.

And as for the "fiery law" if you go to a Jewish website you will read about how the Torah (LAW) :

The Torah was revealed to God's chosen people and thus one needs to seek them in order to rightly understand what the Torah and Tanakh says. I have yet to meet one Jew who states that Muhammed is alluded to in the Torah mainly because the Shuls teach their students Biblical Hebrew. Those are the best sources for us to discuss whether or not Deut. 33:2 infers that it's talking about Muhammed.

Please read the Tanakh commentary by Rashi on Devarim 33:
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/9997/showrashi/true/jewish/Chapter-33.htm

Notice:

1. Jews believe that the children of Ishmael (who dwelled in Paran) were given the Torah (except that according to Rashi they did not accept them).

You should agree with me that some of the verses (although of past tense) may have a prophetic meaning and you can see both Jews and Christians accepting that when arguing over the 'prophecies' of Christ from the OT.

2. If I take Rashi's commentary of Devarim 33:2 correctly , the "fiery law" was also given to the Ishmaelites at Mount Paran as it was given to Moses at Sinai.

From a historical point of view, what "fiery law" from G-d was given to the Arabs at Paran (whom Rashi mentioned the Ishmaelites resided)?

Rashi mentioned that G-d gave the Torah to the Ishmaelites but they did not want to accept it. From a historical pov, Jews do not overtly try to convert the Arabs to Judaism and there was no records of Arabs resisting the spread of Judaism in the Hijaz.

I can only conclude that this "fiery law" given to the Ishmaelites at Mount Paran was a divine law separate from the Torah and it was so significant that it has to be included in Deuteronomy 33:2.

[/font]So unless I see a link to an Orthodox Jewish/Jewish website saying that the "Adonai" in that verse pertains to a descendant of Ishmael, I shall leave you guys to it.

Already did. It surprised me as well that Jewish rabbi actually believe the children of Ishmaelites were given G-d's law.

 

[Lotuspetal_uk]

The website you referred to is about the sacredness of the name of G-d and the prohibition of misusing G-d's name. That is good and applies to Islam and Muslims as well.

Peace be upon you,

What you now have to do in terms of the context of this verse is see, in the Hebrew, what word is used there (Adonai) and what it pertains to. With respect, you can't just allude to a metaphor without substantiating that with Jewish sources. Because we can go to and fro and I will still not accept your assertions without evidence. Where I am coming from can best be described as a Christian (as you see alot on here ) using the Quran to prove a point and failing to substantiate their assertion with clear Hadeeths and the Arabic. All I am asking is for you to do the same, here.

I am setting an even ground in that I have chosen not to go with Christian scholars/sources on this issue and likewise I have asked that you limit this to just Jewish sources and not Christian/Muslim sources. Again to show that there is no bias in the verse itself.

Like Secundulus, you have difficulty understanding what I meant by mataphors. I am not saying that G-d = Moses or Muhammad, which is outright blasphemy. What I am saying is that while Moses (and Muhammad) were significant in receiving the 'fiery law' in Sinai and Paran, it was G-d who actually wills and effected the event.

And whilst I am indeed familiar with what a metaphor is and how it is used, I would like to see rabbinical teachings to support your assertions here - that Deut 33:2 is a metaphoric prophecy about Muhammed coming.

You may want to ask why "The Lord came from Sinai and shone forth from Seir to them; He appeared from Mount Paran...."

1. What is the significance of mentioning Sinai, Seir and Mount Paran? Why Mount Paran? I thought Moses receive teh Torah at Sinai?

2. Please show me where Jews would object if I say "the Lord came from Sinai..." to imply that Moses receive the Torah from G-d at Sinai.

If you notice from one of the maps earlier in the thread, some archaeologists point to the "Sea of Reeds" as being the point at which the Israelites crossed to escape Pharoah. Some assert that it was the gulf of Aqaba that they entered into. From that point, you enter into the Arabic Peninsula. But that is not the issue I have here. Now for the context of Deuteronomy 33:2 does this have any bearing......no. Why? Because the chapter is talking about how Moses blessed the tribes of Israel on his deathbed. So show me from Hebrew sources why on his deathbed he would want to talk about a descendant of Ishmael given the purpose that God assigned Moses from the burning bush.

If I use "ten thousand" it would not mean I am wrong as the number is also considered as "myriad". More importantly, I use "ten thousands" because from a historical context, the "ten thousand" is more significant to the actual event that happened in Paran.

The OP and islamic sources assert that it reads "ten thousands" because of its attempt to link it directly to Muhammed. Now what I am saying is show me within rabbincal teachings that the "myriad" in this verse pertains to the descendants of Ishamael. That's all.

Please read the Tanakh commentary by Rashi on Devarim 33:
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/9997/showrashi/true/jewish/Chapter-33.htm

Notice:

1. Jews believe that the children of Ishmael (who dwelled in Paran) were given the Torah (except that according to Rashi they did not accept them).

You should agree with me that some of the verses (although of past tense) may have a prophetic meaning and you can see both Jews and Christians accepting that when arguing over the 'prophecies' of Christ from the OT.

2. If I take Rashi's commentary of Devarim 33:2 correctly , the "fiery law" was also given to the Ishmaelites at Mount Paran as it was given to Moses at Sinai.

From a historical point of view, what "fiery law" from G-d was given to the Arabs at Paran (whom Rashi mentioned the Ishmaelites resided)?

Rashi mentioned that G-d gave the Torah to the Ishmaelites but they did not want to accept it. From a historical pov, Jews do not overtly try to convert the Arabs to Judaism and there was no records of Arabs resisting the spread of Judaism in the Hijaz.

I can only conclude that this "fiery law" given to the Ishmaelites at Mount Paran was a divine law separate from the Torah and it was so significant that it has to be included in Deuteronomy 33:2.

Already did. It surprised me as well that Jewish rabbi actually believe the children of Ishmaelites were given G-d's law.

With the information you have gleaned I can see that you would conclude as you do. However a Jewish person does not just take one source. Why did the Ishmaelites and the rest of the nations reject the Torah? Why is it written that the Jews accepted it?

When looking into it further one sees....

[FONT=TREBUCHET, ARIAL, HELVETICA]The Sages (Sifri on Deuteronomy 33:2) tell us that before the Torah was given to the Jewish People, it was offered to all the other nations of the world. Upon receiving the offer, each nation wanted to know exactly what was in this Torah. When they heard the answer, however, when they were given an example of what they might expect, they refused to accept it. Actually the very act of asking what was written in the Torah was, in itself, a rejection of God's offer. For when these nations questioned the contents of the Torah, they were already stating that they would accept it only if it suited them. They had no love for God, no desire to fulfill His Will. Theirs was only a self-centered, self-serving mentality. At any rate, the Torah was incompatible with them, for it diametrically opposed their lifestyle.[/FONT]

[FONT=TREBUCHET, ARIAL, HELVETICA]

One now needs to ask from your post why the Ishamaelites rejected the Torah:

[/FONT]

[FONT=TREBUCHET, ARIAL, HELVETICA]God came from Sinai, having shone forth to them from Seir, having appeared to them from Mt. Paran (Deut. 33:2) When God was about to give the Torah to the Jews, he went around to the other nations to see if any of them would also like to accept it. Among others he went to the nation of Ishmael [whose home base was the Mt. Paran referred to in the verse] God said to them, "Are you interested in accepting the Torah upon yourselves? They asked God, "What is written in it?" God answered, "Among other things it says, 'don't steal'". They answered, "But this is the very blessing that our forefather bestowed on us, as it is written, He will be a wild man, whose hand is against everyone while everyone's hand is against him. As the Torah forbids theft how could we possibly accept it?" (Yalkut Yisro, 286)[/FONT]

[FONT=TREBUCHET, ARIAL, HELVETICA]

To conclude, I cannot see given the context of the chapter, the purpose of Torah and the commentary from its sources (not Christian nor Muslim), how Deuteronomy 33:2 infers, or metaphorically alludes to Muhammed.

Just my tuppence, on the issue. Not looking to debate on this, as you can see I don't tend to frequent here very often. But I'm happy to be open to an idea if it is supported with evidence.

I've yet to see that in this thread...

Shalom Aleikhem, As-Salaam Alikum, Peace be upon you.
LP
[/FONT]

 

[Islam_mulia]

Peace be upon you,

What you now have to do in terms of the context of this verse is see, in the Hebrew, what word is used there (Adonai) and what it pertains to. With respect, you can't just allude to a metaphor without substantiating that with Jewish sources. Because we can go to and fro and I will still not accept your assertions without evidence. Where I am coming from can best be described as a Christian (as you see alot on here ) using the Quran to prove a point and failing to substantiate their assertion with clear Hadeeths and the Arabic. All I am asking is for you to do the same, here.

I thought it was clear enough. It was never my point that "Lord" or "Adonoi" in Deu 33:2 was referring to prophet(s). The verse was alluding to G-d giving the "fiery law" both at Sinai and Mount Paran.

At this stage, do you agree with my statement?

And whilst I am indeed familiar with what a metaphor is and how it is used, I would like to see rabbinical teachings to support your assertions here - that Deut 33:2 is a metaphoric prophecy about Muhammed coming.

That is like asking me to quote an Orthodox Jew saying Jesus was prophecised in the Tanakh!

As your concern is the metaphorical usage in Deu 33:2, will you agree with me that Jews accept the verse to mean that G-d gave Moses the Torah at Sinai?

If you notice from one of the maps earlier in the thread, some archaeologists point to the "Sea of Reeds" as being the point at which the Israelites crossed to escape Pharoah. Some assert that it was the gulf of Aqaba that they entered into. From that point, you enter into the Arabic Peninsula. But that is not the issue I have here.

I agree. I only wanted to tell Secundulus that it is possible Paran is not in Egypt.

Now for the context of Deuteronomy 33:2 does this have any bearing......no. Why? Because the chapter is talking about how Moses blessed the tribes of Israel on his deathbed. So show me from Hebrew sources why on his deathbed he would want to talk about a descendant of Ishmael given the purpose that God assigned Moses from the burning bush.

There is one thing that Muslims and Christians can agree when referencing the OT - sometimes we do not agree with the commentaries of the Jews.

The Jews claimed to be G-d's chosen people and it will be quite a task to persuade them to believe that the Ishmaelites, their Arab adversaries, could spearhead God's Kingdom on earth.

Nonetheless, we could use the OT to see how it is parallel to what was mentioned in the Quran, just like what Christians use the OT to claim about the Suffering Servant.

The OP and islamic sources assert that it reads "ten thousands" because of its attempt to link it directly to Muhammed. Now what I am saying is show me within rabbincal teachings that the "myriad" in this verse pertains to the descendants of Ishamael. That's all.

I will be more curious to know the significance of this "myriad of holy ones" at Mount Paran?
You have not asnwered my previous questions:

1. If you believe Moses received the "fiery law" at Sinai, who received the "fiery law" at Mount Paran?

2. What is the significance of Mount Paran? Why Mount Paran and not Mount Cook?

3. If you wish to say that it was a historical truth that Moses escaped with millions of Jews out of Egypt, what historical event was there at Mount Paran that involves "myriad of holy ones" (if you insist that I should not say ten thousands) when God gave the Ishmaelites the "fiery law"?

With the information you have gleaned I can see that you would conclude as you do. However a Jewish person does not just take one source. Why did the Ishmaelites and the rest of the nations reject the Torah? Why is it written that the Jews accepted it?

When looking into it further one sees....



[FONT=TREBUCHET, ARIAL, HELVETICA]One now needs to ask from your post why the Ishamaelites rejected the Torah:

There is no historical truth that the Torah was offered to "all nations of the world". In fact, I think that is more of a myth.

There is no historical record of Jews offering the Torah to the Arabs, or trying to make them accept Judaism. Strange idea from Jewish sages and I suspect it was made to prove they are selected to be God's Chosen people!
[/FONT]

 

[Secundulus]

I agree. I only wanted to tell Secundulus that it is possible Paran is not in Egypt.

While that is possible, you cannot seriously expect me to believe that it was instead over 400 miles away in Mecca.

 

[Islam_mulia]

While that is possible, you cannot seriously expect me to believe that it was instead over 400 miles away in Mecca.

Can you provide reason why you cannot 'seriously believe'?

 

[Secundulus]

Can you provide reason why you cannot 'seriously believe'?

Because even the theories that place Sinai in Arabia place it in the NW portion. Paran is a three day walk from Sinai. Even the Jews cannot walk over 400 miles in three days.

 

[Islam_mulia]

Because even the theories that place Sinai in Arabia place it in the NW portion. Paran is a three day walk from Sinai. Even the Jews cannot walk over 400 miles in three days.

The Proposal by BASE Institute and CARM is that Mount Sinai is at South of present day Saudi Arabia.

http://www.carm.org/questions/desert.htm

I will then agree that a 3-day walk from Mount Sinai to Mount Paran (Mecca & Medina) is a possibility (see map of from CARM).

 

[ContraMundum]

Muslims WANT to be like these 'saints' and so we are asking Christians --> Who exactly are these "ten thousands of saints"?

To be a "saint", you have to be holy, set apart, and in God's covenant- as understood at the time of the book of Jude. (eg. Christians, holy angels, the righteous Jews and Gentiles of old.)

Why is that truth closed to any other religion that will come later? The answer is in verse 3:

᾿Αγαπητοί, πᾶσαν σπουδὴν ποιούμενος γράφειν ὑμῖν περὶ τῆς κοινῆς σωτηρίας, ἀνάγκην ἔσχον γράψαι ὑμῖν παρακαλῶν ἐπαγωνίζεσθαι τῇ ἅπαξ παραδοθείσῃ τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστει.

Literally: "Beloved, Having made all haste to write to you about the common salvation, I had need to write to you to exhort you to contend earnestly for the faith once for all delivered to the saints."

The revelation given to the saints is sealed.

Saints= holy, set apart, sanctified. Literally consecrated to God. The way that happens is already explained within that "faith" given "once for all" and sealed. You want to be a saint, then follow Jesus and live according to the New Testament, the sealed, finite, revelation.

Sainthood therefore, cannot apply to any later supposed revelation, and thus, any disciple of any new revelation cannot by definition be spoken of in the book of Jude. Sainthood cannot belong to a disciple of Mohammed because revelation from God was sealed centuries before Mohammed existed. See also Rev 22:18-19 for a repetition of the principle of sealing and conclusing revelation.

You asked for a Christian explanation of a Christian document, there you have it. Repent and believe the Gospel.

 

[Lotuspetal_uk]

I thought it was clear enough. It was never my point that "Lord" or "Adonoi" in Deu 33:2 was referring to prophet(s). The verse was alluding to G-d giving the "fiery law" both at Sinai and Mount Paran........
.......
There is no historical truth that the Torah was offered to "all nations of the world". In fact, I think that is more of a myth.

There is no historical record of Jews offering the Torah to the Arabs, or trying to make them accept Judaism. Strange idea from Jewish sages and I suspect it was made to prove they are selected to be God's Chosen people!

Okay....

Your last post has shown that you still cannot provide non Islamic evidence that Muhammed is alluded to in Deut 33:2. That's cool and that's all I wanted to see. Thank you

We can indeed go to and fro, but I can see that it would not be fruitful. You have provided what I needed to see.

Peace be with you

 

[Lotuspetal_uk]

To be a "saint", you have to be holy, set apart, and in God's covenant- as understood at the time of the book of Jude. (eg. Christians, holy angels, the righteous Jews and Gentiles of old.)

Why is that truth closed to any other religion that will come later? The answer is in verse 3:

᾿Αγαπητοί, πᾶσαν σπουδὴν ποιούμενος γράφειν ὑμῖν περὶ τῆς κοινῆς σωτηρίας, ἀνάγκην ἔσχον γράψαι ὑμῖν παρακαλῶν ἐπαγωνίζεσθαι τῇ ἅπαξ παραδοθείσῃ τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστει.

Literally: "Beloved, Having made all haste to write to you about the common salvation, I had need to write to you to exhort you to contend earnestly for the faith once for all delivered to the saints."

The revelation given to the saints is sealed.

Saints= holy, set apart, sanctified. Literally consecrated to God. The way that happens is already explained within that "faith" given "once for all" and sealed. You want to be a saint, then follow Jesus and live according to the New Testament, the sealed, finite, revelation.

Sainthood therefore, cannot apply to any later supposed revelation, and thus, any disciple of any new revelation cannot by definition be spoken of in the book of Jude. Sainthood cannot belong to a disciple of Mohammed because revelation from God was sealed centuries before Mohammed existed. See also Rev 22:18-19 for a repetition of the principle of sealing and conclusing revelation.

You asked for a Christian explanation of a Christian document, there you have it. Repent and believe the Gospel.

 

[Secundulus]

The Proposal by BASE Institute and CARM is that Mount Sinai is at South of present day Saudi Arabia.

http://www.carm.org/questions/desert.htm

I will then agree that a 3-day walk from Mount Sinai to Mount Paran (Mecca & Medina) is a possibility (see map of from CARM).

The map you posted places Sinai at over 400 miles from Mecca. My point stands.

 

[Islam_mulia]

The map you posted places Sinai at over 400 miles from Mecca. My point stands.

I still cannot understand why you think the Jews cannot walk for 400 miles in 3 days? Why do you insist on '3 days'? Do you have any records to show that it is impossible?

 

[Islam_mulia]

Okay....

Your last post has shown that you still cannot provide non Islamic evidence that Muhammed is alluded to in Deut 33:2. That's cool and that's all I wanted to see. Thank you

We can indeed go to and fro, but I can see that it would not be fruitful. You have provided what I needed to see.

Peace be with you

I am glad that you can only come up with the above answers. I was actually expecting a more critical refutation but...

Seeing that I have posted a number of questions that were left unanswered, I should maybe open up the discussion to others who may comment why Deuteronomy 33:2 could not have referenced to a prophet from the tribe of Ishmael who received a "fiery law" at Mount Paran.

Thank you Dinosaur for the interesting discussion.