“If God did not create evil then who did? Who has the power of creation in your universe?”

Lyfe

Star
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
2,375
I agree, but there's a huge difference between the "new ager" you speak of and those who campaign on the internet against Jesus Christ and his gospel. They went from being an "ex christian" to a literal enemy of the gospel. That's very rare. They know that Christianity teaches a Trinity, they've been shown countless times where Jesus does indeed claim to be God in the flesh, and they've been shown through scripture that salvation is by grace through faith, because they drag the whole idea through the mud. In fact they drag the whole gospel through the mud. Anyone with a conscience wouldn't do that.their hearts have been hardened like Pharoah. They're incapable of believing like the Pharisees.
You have some very solid and biblical points. I am just very hesitant to deem someone to be unsavable. Paul heard the preaching of the gospel and even approved of the stoning of Stephen tho God was still able to stop him dead in his tracks and shine the light of truth into his heart. God was even able to humble the king of babylon. He made Nebbuchanezer see that he was lord. These are persons that only God could debase and then bring to the truth. God can break any man and humble any person! He can smash thru the stony surface of any heart.
 






Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,365
@Axl888 when did i say the bible was corrupt? Youre mixing my views with other ppls views.

The quran doesnt say the bible is corrupt. The translators and interpreters deduced that because they were morons.

I dont believe in contradictions. In the 7th century Quran, Allah confirmed the authenticity of the torah the jews were reading and the gospel the christians were reading.

Any 'corruption' refers to interpretations and translations.
Just as it says in jeremiah "the lying hand of the scribes has corrupted it".
In the hadith, Mohammed held the jewish torah in his hand, placed it on his pillow (out of respect) and said out loud "I believe in YOU".
That is significant.
Howevee soon the muslims had arabic torahs written by local rabbis and were reading them. To that the prophet was angry. However he also said"neither deny a part of it (that is, those translations) incase it is still God's Word (ie correctly translated) nor accept any part lf incase it is a false interpretarion. Rather, say, "i believe in what Allah revealed"

Yeh, you jump to conclusions but have a lot to learn and you still say something stupid im sure.
 






Bubbajay

Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2021
Messages
705
You have some very solid and biblical points. I am just very hesitant to deem someone to be unsavable. Paul heard the preaching of the gospel and even approved of the stoning of Stephen tho God was still able to stop him dead in his tracks and shine the light of truth into his heart. God was even able to humble the king of babylon. He made Nebbuchanezer see that he was lord. These are persons that only God could debase and then bring to the truth. God can break any man and humble any person! He can smash thru the stony surface of any heart.
I understand your reasoning, but Paul was ignorant of the gospel, and didn't repent until he seen Christ. The OT has stories of the "sons of Belial" that tried to lead followers away from God to turn them to idols. These were people within the kingdom of Israel who were doing these things.

Have you noticed how zealot these converts are in blaspheming Jesus Christ compared to a Muslim who was born into the religion? its like night and day
 






Last edited:

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
350
@Axl888 when did i say the bible was corrupt? Youre mixing my views with other ppls views.

The quran doesnt say the bible is corrupt. The translators and interpreters deduced that because they were morons.

I dont believe in contradictions. In the 7th century Quran, Allah confirmed the authenticity of the torah the jews were reading and the gospel the christians were reading.

Any 'corruption' refers to interpretations and translations.
Just as it says in jeremiah "the lying hand of the scribes has corrupted it".
In the hadith, Mohammed held the jewish torah in his hand, placed it on his pillow (out of respect) and said out loud "I believe in YOU".
That is significant.
Howevee soon the muslims had arabic torahs written by local rabbis and were reading them. To that the prophet was angry. However he also said"neither deny a part of it (that is, those translations) incase it is still God's Word (ie correctly translated) nor accept any part lf incase it is a false interpretarion. Rather, say, "i believe in what Allah revealed"

Yeh, you jump to conclusions but have a lot to learn and you still say something stupid im sure.
OK, since you as a muslim say the Bible is not corrupted, do you believe Jesus Christ was crucified and died, and on the 3rd day had risen from the dead according to the Gospel?

Remember what quran says...

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-
— Quran 4:157–158[12]

If you say you believe, then you are saying that the author/s of the quran are liars, and if not, then you are just again doing taqiyya hence just compounding the evidence that you are indeed doing taqiyya.
 






Bubbajay

Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2021
Messages
705
OK, since you as a muslim say the Bible is not corrupted, do you believe Jesus Christ was crucified and died, and on the 3rd day had risen from the dead according to the Gospel?

Remember what quran says...

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-
— Quran 4:157–158[12]

If you say you believe, then you are saying that the author/s of the quran are liars, and if not, then you are just again doing taqiyya hence just compounding the evidence that you are indeed doing taqiyya.
Its obvious they are liars. Even the Judaics in the Talmud admit they killed Jesus Christ. They claim it was justified, because Jesus did his miracles through devils. They even admit his miracles, even though they blaspemed the Holy Spirit, and whoever believes it will not be forgiven.
 






Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
11,468
Its obvious they are liars. Even the Judaics in the Talmud admit they killed Jesus Christ. They claim it was justified, because Jesus did his miracles through devils. They even admit his miracles, even though they blaspemed the Holy Spirit, and whoever believes it will not be forgiven.
I like this ministry!

I thought this set out a very intelligent assessment of the issues, rejecting both the poles of replacement theology and dual covenant theology. The speaker who is a Messianic Jew (I.e. a Christian from a Jewish background) pulls no punches when it comes to exposing the deception of the Talmudic teachings of Rabbinic Judaism.

 






Last edited:
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,365
OK, since you as a muslim say the Bible is not corrupted, do you believe Jesus Christ was crucified and died, and on the 3rd day had risen from the dead according to the Gospel?

Remember what quran says...

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-
— Quran 4:157–158[12]

If you say you believe, then you are saying that the author/s of the quran are liars, and if not, then you are just again doing taqiyya hence just compounding the evidence that you are indeed doing taqiyya.
you do not understand islam nor the verse you're quoting. You think you do right now, but ill explain it with more clarity to you shortly.
A few things..
historically muslims were the majority with a christian minority. so debates or any type of dialogue on such topics, was bound to be too easily skewed and never truely open and honest, nor well researched. However even so there have been many muslims who openly spoke in terms that show they clearly believed in the crucifixion. it's just that their voice is filtered out over time by the opposition. so in a sense islam's true position on this topic was hijacked by a mob.
in the post modern secular english speaking world, the likes of Ahmed Deedat appeared. whatever their original ideald and intentions, they were only human and prone to mistakes like anyone. This is before we could just google for information...and plus when they were debating, there's always going to be some ego involved.

just give you an example of how Ahmad Deedat was wrong on a few things

-he quoted the hebrew word 'machmad' in the Song of Songs and said 'that's MOHAMMED!!!ITS A PROPHECY!!!' (it wasnt, he was wrong).
-he quoted deuteronomy 18:18 and said the word 'brethren' meant 'ishmaelites, as brothers of isaac's line' therefore the implication being that this verse was another reference to MOHAMMED.
He was of course totally wrong. the word was 'ummati' translated as 'brethren'. ummati being an arabic word aswell, means 'someone from our NATION'. hence deuteronomy 18:18 was a reference to israelite prophets not any gentile (not forgetting it was already given to Jesus in the NT),
-he saw the word 'camels' in a random isaiah prophecy and said 'that's MOHAMMED/ISLAM'.
again, he was wrong. so just because he was a cool guy with a cool accent and some eloquence, a great memory otherwise...and was debating total dingbats, it doesnt mean he was right on those topics, so why would he be right on the crucifixion topic? afterall all of these assumptions are based on his work. However his work was made popular due to mass printing and digital media and then guys like zakir naik parroted him and tried to profit heavily off the genre.


now ive said that, ill just break this down simply..

1) islam says this about martyrs
And call not those who are slain in the way of Allah "dead." Nay, they are living, only ye perceive not.
(سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #154)


have a little think on this. People who have physically died a martyrs death...are alive. they only appear dead to our external sense perception.
but how and why?
this requires a little deeper understanding of the self. Death and passing away are not the same. martyrs pass away but do not die. DEATH occurs when our carnal nature, the serpent within us, is BOUND to the grave and suffers according tot he extent of our carnal attachments, till the day of judgement. This imprisonment is DEATH.
In islamic hadith this carnal nature, the serpent, is described as a '99 headed snake that torments you in the grave'.
The period between death/passing away and judgement day, is called Barzakh and is the same as sheol/hades.

Now martyrs, at least the true martyrs, their carnal attachments are severed when they die in God's cause, as in they gave up all their earthly attachments for a cause and hence they are not bound to the grave. They pass away (appear dead to the eye) but their souls are free/alive in barzakh.

2) i could of course argue that there are various verses and hadith which prove the Torah and Gospel ARE 'THE WORD OF GOD!!' and as ive said, any reference to 'corruption' was only about the interpretations and translations, esp those translations written by rabbis in arabia and shared with muslims in a time when muslims were in a state of conflict already. As such, if the bible says he was crucified, im not going to question that. Rather, i will try to understand the Quranic verse 4:157 in light of what was already given in the Bible.

simple
-the sadducees were the ones who denied life after death and the resurrection. they only believe in sheol, the underworld..and that we all go there.
-the sadducees were the biggest driving force behind the crucifixion. The pharisees may have clashed with Jesus but they could not directly disagree with his thinking. they knew he was right but were opposed to him out of their own attachments to their position. The sadducees however straight up hated Jesus and wanted him dead.

So when the Quranic verse says 'they said in BOAST' it is not just any kind of reference to any kind of jew, it is specific to the true context, the sadducees. Thus knowing the sadducees denied the afterlife completely, the Quran highlights how Jesus 'appeared dead' (to them, in their perception) but they were wrong, he wasnt dead nor was he crucified.

makes sense to me, Jesus being the LOGOS at the highest point..and a martyr at the lowest...either one, how could he DIE?
so the Quran is right.

3) if you say
'but the verse says specifically 'but they killed him not, nor crucified him'', then you'll be misquoting it. That is what muslims have been doing, guys like ahmed deedat.
as ive said, it begins with 'they said in boast' and so the rest is related to this story.

4) just to give you an example of how some muslims have manouvered around this topic through utter deception.

-some read the gnostic apocalypse of peter
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."

so what did they do with this? they went as far as WRITING THE QURAN WITH THEIR OWN HANDS!! like this

this here is the mOHSIN KHAN translation of the verse
And because of their saying (in boast), "We killed Messiah 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah," - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but it appeared so to them [the resemblance of 'Îsa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man)], and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) عليهما السلام]:
(سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #157)


so you cant tell me that by differing from these regular dufus muslims, im the one who is sidelined and wrong. im speaking honesty here. this verse translation contains the actual misinterpretations of a stupid man, whoever he was. this 'mob' has influenced hundreds of millions of muslims. so by this stage, its fair to say the majority of muslims will continue believing what they believe, because it's hard to stop a moving train...
im one guy, but there are thousands who prob repeat this crappy lie every single hour of the day.

-another example was that muslims clearly forged a book called 'the gospel of barnabas'. i dont need to get into specifics, its a muslim created forgery.

-going back to the actual gnostic text
even though im sure you reject gnosticism, the text itself actually doesnt even imply what that idiot mohsin khan and others assumed (eg that another man, maybe even judas, decided to take on a physical transformation and appeared to look like Jesus to con the jews). the 'substitute' was the physical body itself, as a substitute of the spiritual body 'made in it's likeness'.
i dont believe the physical world is hell, indeed the body is called 'temple of God'. However typically when we speak of the physical body and the world we're talking about the FLESH/sin.

islam has a lot of material on the subject of 'dying before death' as in spiritual martydom. not just martydom in battle, but to kill the nafs/ego/flesh before physically passing away. on that theme.
ive touched on this before..you think islam is just slavery/under the law. However ISLAM is only the second level of faith. The word 'islam' is just adopted as the name of the whole religion, but the religion really has islam as the second of three stages. The first is iman (belief where one is still sinful and ruled by the flesh). Islam is submission to the will of God, but the highest level is IHSAN. Long story short, ihsan is that level Jesus was preaching. the SINGLE EYE, to see God in all things (not literally)..and that means to not even leave room for the 'self'. So of course islam has a lot of history with this topic. So this topic is not something new. it's just that muslim-christian dialogue is a seperate genre and typically muslims from one field dont get involved in another.
islam is also very very diverse in all other fields. its just that with the dawah stuff with christians, int he modern contexts it is monopolised by a very small few who got the benefits of the age we live in. past generations didnt have those advantages so it wasnt monopolised before.
maybe you just arent that away of muslim diversity in terms of our interpretations and world view?

5) lastly, no, there is no taqqiyah eitherway. i explained what taqqiyah really means and the context it relates to.
when you run out of arguments you just say 'oh your lying about your faith'
im in no fear of you, we're online, we both hold secular values and this isnt the 7th century.
taqqiyah itself in its original quranic context was not merely about dialogue between muslims and people of the book, in matters of faith. it was about all areas of life..for muslims to just be on their guard against non-muslims who would be a threat to them.
being on our guard doesnt mean weve got license to lie..it just means we're not going to be as trusting of you.

for example, if i was in the holy land, jerusalem.i would be on my guard against israelis. afterall they've killed muslims before there and will do it again im sure. if im on a forum like this, why would i need to be on my guard against you? lol im calling you 'xtians' so clearly im not on my guard.
 






Last edited:
Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
28
Imho,
genuinely harmful taqqiyah
(to innocent / gullible Earth's inhabitants)
is what them freemaSOBs, jesuits, holy see, brit royals, bloodlines et. al. continuously have done and still do. Also instruct their progeny to continue.

All for merely clasping on the transient fruits of the temporary matrix.

Human beings who do not toe their line are either gaslighted, blashphemed, disgraced, dishonoured or murdered. Take JFK, Lady Di, MLK, et. al.

I would logically reckon - there had to be drastic steps taken to mathematically harmonise the imbalance i.e. to counterbalance this inequality of godforsaken "brethern" cult on this planet.
 






Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,365
Really??? LOL...you sound so desperate there with rest of your post (i.e. mental gymnastics)...I am done exposing you.
looks like you picked a side (your ego) and cannot worship it enough.
my beliefs are strong. yours are pathetic.

'taqqiyah doe'
 






Lyfe

Star
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
2,375
you do not understand islam nor the verse you're quoting. You think you do right now, but ill explain it with more clarity to you shortly.
A few things..
historically muslims were the majority with a christian minority. so debates or any type of dialogue on such topics, was bound to be too easily skewed and never truely open and honest, nor well researched. However even so there have been many muslims who openly spoke in terms that show they clearly believed in the crucifixion. it's just that their voice is filtered out over time by the opposition. so in a sense islam's true position on this topic was hijacked by a mob.
in the post modern secular english speaking world, the likes of Ahmed Deedat appeared. whatever their original ideald and intentions, they were only human and prone to mistakes like anyone. This is before we could just google for information...and plus when they were debating, there's always going to be some ego involved.

just give you an example of how Ahmad Deedat was wrong on a few things

-he quoted the hebrew word 'machmad' in the Song of Songs and said 'that's MOHAMMED!!!ITS A PROPHECY!!!' (it wasnt, he was wrong).
-he quoted deuteronomy 18:18 and said the word 'brethren' meant 'ishmaelites, as brothers of isaac's line' therefore the implication being that this verse was another reference to MOHAMMED.
He was of course totally wrong. the word was 'ummati' translated as 'brethren'. ummati being an arabic word aswell, means 'someone from our NATION'. hence deuteronomy 18:18 was a reference to israelite prophets not any gentile (not forgetting it was already given to Jesus in the NT),
-he saw the word 'camels' in a random isaiah prophecy and said 'that's MOHAMMED/ISLAM'.
again, he was wrong. so just because he was a cool guy with a cool accent and some eloquence, a great memory otherwise...and was debating total dingbats, it doesnt mean he was right on those topics, so why would he be right on the crucifixion topic? afterall all of these assumptions are based on his work. However his work was made popular due to mass printing and digital media and then guys like zakir naik parroted him and tried to profit heavily off the genre.


now ive said that, ill just break this down simply..

1) islam says this about martyrs
And call not those who are slain in the way of Allah "dead." Nay, they are living, only ye perceive not.
(سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #154)


have a little think on this. People who have physically died a martyrs death...are alive. they only appear dead to our external sense perception.
but how and why?
this requires a little deeper understanding of the self. Death and passing away are not the same. martyrs pass away but do not die. DEATH occurs when our carnal nature, the serpent within us, is BOUND to the grave and suffers according tot he extent of our carnal attachments, till the day of judgement. This imprisonment is DEATH.
In islamic hadith this carnal nature, the serpent, is described as a '99 headed snake that torments you in the grave'.
The period between death/passing away and judgement day, is called Barzakh and is the same as sheol/hades.

Now martyrs, at least the true martyrs, their carnal attachments are severed when they die in God's cause, as in they gave up all their earthly attachments for a cause and hence they are not bound to the grave. They pass away (appear dead to the eye) but their souls are free/alive in barzakh.

2) i could of course argue that there are various verses and hadith which prove the Torah and Gospel ARE 'THE WORD OF GOD!!' and as ive said, any reference to 'corruption' was only about the interpretations and translations, esp those translations written by rabbis in arabia and shared with muslims in a time when muslims were in a state of conflict already. As such, if the bible says he was crucified, im not going to question that. Rather, i will try to understand the Quranic verse 4:157 in light of what was already given in the Bible.

simple
-the sadducees were the ones who denied life after death and the resurrection. they only believe in sheol, the underworld..and that we all go there.
-the sadducees were the biggest driving force behind the crucifixion. The pharisees may have clashed with Jesus but they could not directly disagree with his thinking. they knew he was right but were opposed to him out of their own attachments to their position. The sadducees however straight up hated Jesus and wanted him dead.

So when the Quranic verse says 'they said in BOAST' it is not just any kind of reference to any kind of jew, it is specific to the true context, the sadducees. Thus knowing the sadducees denied the afterlife completely, the Quran highlights how Jesus 'appeared dead' (to them, in their perception) but they were wrong, he wasnt dead nor was he crucified.

makes sense to me, Jesus being the LOGOS at the highest point..and a martyr at the lowest...either one, how could he DIE?
so the Quran is right.

3) if you say
'but the verse says specifically 'but they killed him not, nor crucified him'', then you'll be misquoting it. That is what muslims have been doing, guys like ahmed deedat.
as ive said, it begins with 'they said in boast' and so the rest is related to this story.

4) just to give you an example of how some muslims have manouvered around this topic through utter deception.

-some read the gnostic apocalypse of peter
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."

so what did they do with this? they went as far as WRITING THE QURAN WITH THEIR OWN HANDS!! like this

this here is the mOHSIN KHAN translation of the verse
And because of their saying (in boast), "We killed Messiah 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah," - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but it appeared so to them [the resemblance of 'Îsa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man)], and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) عليهما السلام]:
(سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #157)


so you cant tell me that by differing from these regular dufus muslims, im the one who is sidelined and wrong. im speaking honesty here. this verse translation contains the actual misinterpretations of a stupid man, whoever he was. this 'mob' has influenced hundreds of millions of muslims. so by this stage, its fair to say the majority of muslims will continue believing what they believe, because it's hard to stop a moving train...
im one guy, but there are thousands who prob repeat this crappy lie every single hour of the day.

-another example was that muslims clearly forged a book called 'the gospel of barnabas'. i dont need to get into specifics, its a muslim created forgery.

-going back to the actual gnostic text
even though im sure you reject gnosticism, the text itself actually doesnt even imply what that idiot mohsin khan and others assumed (eg that another man, maybe even judas, decided to take on a physical transformation and appeared to look like Jesus to con the jews). the 'substitute' was the physical body itself, as a substitute of the spiritual body 'made in it's likeness'.
i dont believe the physical world is hell, indeed the body is called 'temple of God'. However typically when we speak of the physical body and the world we're talking about the FLESH/sin.

islam has a lot of material on the subject of 'dying before death' as in spiritual martydom. not just martydom in battle, but to kill the nafs/ego/flesh before physically passing away. on that theme.
ive touched on this before..you think islam is just slavery/under the law. However ISLAM is only the second level of faith. The word 'islam' is just adopted as the name of the whole religion, but the religion really has islam as the second of three stages. The first is iman (belief where one is still sinful and ruled by the flesh). Islam is submission to the will of God, but the highest level is IHSAN. Long story short, ihsan is that level Jesus was preaching. the SINGLE EYE, to see God in all things (not literally)..and that means to not even leave room for the 'self'. So of course islam has a lot of history with this topic. So this topic is not something new. it's just that muslim-christian dialogue is a seperate genre and typically muslims from one field dont get involved in another.
islam is also very very diverse in all other fields. its just that with the dawah stuff with christians, int he modern contexts it is monopolised by a very small few who got the benefits of the age we live in. past generations didnt have those advantages so it wasnt monopolised before.
maybe you just arent that away of muslim diversity in terms of our interpretations and world view?

5) lastly, no, there is no taqqiyah eitherway. i explained what taqqiyah really means and the context it relates to.
when you run out of arguments you just say 'oh your lying about your faith'
im in no fear of you, we're online, we both hold secular values and this isnt the 7th century.
taqqiyah itself in its original quranic context was not merely about dialogue between muslims and people of the book, in matters of faith. it was about all areas of life..for muslims to just be on their guard against non-muslims who would be a threat to them.
being on our guard doesnt mean weve got license to lie..it just means we're not going to be as trusting of you.

for example, if i was in the holy land, jerusalem.i would be on my guard against israelis. afterall they've killed muslims before there and will do it again im sure. if im on a forum like this, why would i need to be on my guard against you? lol im calling you 'xtians' so clearly im not on my guard.
Why do you view Christians with so much contempt?
 






Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,365
Why do you view Christians with so much contempt?
you jus quoted a post of mine where i spoke of the verse 4:157 on the crucifixion topic and actually criticised muslims.

the guy asked me about my views on the crucifixion because he needed me to deny it happened and thus prove that islam and christianity are seperate, that the bible and quran cannot be in agreement.
he had this one set up, until i told him that the crucifixion did happen and islam's position was to highlight the ignorance of the sadducee world view (a materialist world view which the Quran mostly challenges throughout, remember islam's position in the middle east, the pagan arabs were also materialists and mocked any idea of an afterlife).

obv when i say that, im fully aware of that the muslim side has been denying the crucifixion for a long time. my answer to that is simple, the post-modern era allowed a select few to hijack the whole topic from the muslim pov. imagine i'd been the one with my views, debating christians in public throughout the 70s to 90s and then all my material was mass printed, recorded and spread online via youtube. my view would monopolise all other views.
yet islam is a very diverse religion. in fact ive completely fking ripped apart the 'muslim' position and even proven that muslims like the translator mohsin khan, literally wrote the Quran with his own hands.

the truth is, i dislike xtians and muslims.
i actually love CHRISTIANS but they dont really exist anymore. there are very few true christians remaining.
if you want to know the difference between christians and xtians, read Jude 1 and you'll get it.
 






Bubbajay

Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2021
Messages
705
I guess he skipped over the very last verse of Jude lol


“To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.”
 






Lyfe

Star
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
2,375
you jus quoted a post of mine where i spoke of the verse 4:157 on the crucifixion topic and actually criticised muslims.

the guy asked me about my views on the crucifixion because he needed me to deny it happened and thus prove that islam and christianity are seperate, that the bible and quran cannot be in agreement.
he had this one set up, until i told him that the crucifixion did happen and islam's position was to highlight the ignorance of the sadducee world view (a materialist world view which the Quran mostly challenges throughout, remember islam's position in the middle east, the pagan arabs were also materialists and mocked any idea of an afterlife).

obv when i say that, im fully aware of that the muslim side has been denying the crucifixion for a long time. my answer to that is simple, the post-modern era allowed a select few to hijack the whole topic from the muslim pov. imagine i'd been the one with my views, debating christians in public throughout the 70s to 90s and then all my material was mass printed, recorded and spread online via youtube. my view would monopolise all other views.
yet islam is a very diverse religion. in fact ive completely fking ripped apart the 'muslim' position and even proven that muslims like the translator mohsin khan, literally wrote the Quran with his own hands.

the truth is, i dislike xtians and muslims.
i actually love CHRISTIANS but they dont really exist anymore. there are very few true christians remaining.
if you want to know the difference between christians and xtians, read Jude 1 and you'll get it.
Jude is a warning against unregenerate and carnal people claiming to be Christian who use the grace of God as a license to sin.

Is that what you believe an "xtian" is?
 






elsbet

Star
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,999
you jus quoted a post of mine where i spoke of the verse 4:157 on the crucifixion topic and actually criticised muslims.

the guy asked me about my views on the crucifixion because he needed me to deny it happened and thus prove that islam and christianity are seperate, that the bible and quran cannot be in agreement.
he had this one set up, until i told him that the crucifixion did happen and islam's position was to highlight the ignorance of the sadducee world view (a materialist world view which the Quran mostly challenges throughout, remember islam's position in the middle east, the pagan arabs were also materialists and mocked any idea of an afterlife).

obv when i say that, im fully aware of that the muslim side has been denying the crucifixion for a long time. my answer to that is simple, the post-modern era allowed a select few to hijack the whole topic from the muslim pov. imagine i'd been the one with my views, debating christians in public throughout the 70s to 90s and then all my material was mass printed, recorded and spread online via youtube. my view would monopolise all other views.
yet islam is a very diverse religion. in fact ive completely fking ripped apart the 'muslim' position and even proven that muslims like the translator mohsin khan, literally wrote the Quran with his own hands.

the truth is, i dislike xtians and muslims.
i actually love CHRISTIANS but they dont really exist anymore. there are very few true christians remaining.
if you want to know the difference between christians and xtians, read Jude 1 and you'll get it.
If there was no problem with the Torah and the Gospels (according to the prophet), then one must wonder why he added to them, knowing he would be cursed for doing so.
 






Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,365
Jude is a warning against unregenerate and carnal people claiming to be Christian who use the grace of God as a license to sin.

Is that what you believe an "xtian" is?
yes, but back then they were only just 'carnal people' because the truthful christians were still dominant, over time they became pagans and made Jesus CO EQUAL IN GODHEAD.

look, ill give you another example of why i diss muslims man (this is still on topic, read on)
see how many muslims these days diss Paul and say that christianity was hijacked by him?

Yet the Quran says this
O you who believe! Be you helpers (in the Cause) of Allah as said 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), to the Hawariyyun (the disciples): "Who are my helpers (in the Cause) of Allah?" The Hawariyyun (the disciples) said: "We are Allah's helpers" (i.e. we will strive in His Cause!). Then a group of the Children of Israel believed and a group disbelieved. So We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, and they became the victorious (uppermost).
(سورة الصف, As-Saff, Chapter #61, Verse #14)


the implication here isnt only about the disciples, but that true belief prevailed over disbelief (that is in the immediate aftermath of Jesus). Since Paul was the most influential figure behind the rise of early christianity, then it goes without saying he had God on his side. Furthermore,

And when I inspired the disciples, (saying): Believe in Me and in My messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) "we are muslims".
(سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #111)


since GOD inspired the discples, then how can any muslim later argue that the disciples were led astray by Paul or lost to paul in commanding early christianity the right way?

ill tell you a story. i met a fakir once, a spiritual man, someone who came to me, found me and wanted me to follow him. He basically knew me, knew my story. We spoke for hours on our first meeting. Do you know how i decided on my next move? i asked him his opinion of paul and peter.
he told me the same old crap
'peter was led astray by iblees when he saw the vision in the cloud' 'paul was evil etc'
i decided right there that this man was a deception and was here for darker reasons. when i told him he was wrong, his entire demeanor changed and then he proceeded to try and verbally put me down.

Yet it was the Quran that provided my grounding. if i wasnt studying the quran i would not be backing anything else, i would simply be unsure, since my own 'logic' needed direction.

side story: the above verse was also misinterpreted by certain muslims deliberately and this 'help' they claim, is that Jesus asked them to help save him from the crucifixion. So one of them said 'yeh ill help you' and was transformed into Jesus's likeness. This played out when muslims forged a fake book called 'the gospel of barnabas'. So i have little regard for muslims most of the time. or at least muslims in the field of interfaith dialogue. that's why i act so different to them and do not behave like some pious muslim...but its also because i lost my patience with everyone and just dont suffer fools no more.



going back to Jude 1, if they were carnal people, then by faith they should have been saved ie by the power of the cross, apparent in that age of earlier christianity, their carnal nature should have died.
paul himself argued that the circumcision was DEAD (as a symbol of metaphysical transmutation) simply because the jews were sinners and very much carnal. so how could there then be carnal christians at all if the cross was a living symbol and not a dead one?

the fact there were is because they were never real christians. they were simply masquandering as christians, faking it.
if they were mere sinners, then theyu would be in need of God's grace and not to be scorned, yet...


Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people.
4 For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about[b] long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.


how do they deny Jesus?
just one example
Psalm 110, THE LORD/ADONAI (God/Yahweh) says to my lord/adoni(The messiah, Jesus).
Jesus quoted this to the pharisees himself, when they called him 'lord'. that is, adoni...and NOT Adonai.

so as soon as any so called christian starts insisting that 'lord/adoni' now means 'LORD GOD/ADONAI' then we have a problem. they are denying Jesus by elevating him to Godhead, when he isnt God.
Don't get me wrong, I differentiate between God's Trancendent nature and His Immanence. God was Immanent in Jesus when he 'emptied himself' but that doesnt mean Jesus was God. God's Immanence is in all things, doesnt make us panthiest/panenthiest ie we dont view everything as deity in the same way.

basically the xtians are pagans, fake christians who masquander as real ones. The mere denial of Jesus, no matter how you view rhis, means they could never have been true christians to begin with.
 






Lyfe

Star
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
2,375
yes, but back then they were only just 'carnal people' because the truthful christians were still dominant, over time they became pagans and made Jesus CO EQUAL IN GODHEAD.

look, ill give you another example of why i diss muslims man (this is still on topic, read on)
see how many muslims these days diss Paul and say that christianity was hijacked by him?

Yet the Quran says this
O you who believe! Be you helpers (in the Cause) of Allah as said 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), to the Hawariyyun (the disciples): "Who are my helpers (in the Cause) of Allah?" The Hawariyyun (the disciples) said: "We are Allah's helpers" (i.e. we will strive in His Cause!). Then a group of the Children of Israel believed and a group disbelieved. So We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, and they became the victorious (uppermost).
(سورة الصف, As-Saff, Chapter #61, Verse #14)


the implication here isnt only about the disciples, but that true belief prevailed over disbelief (that is in the immediate aftermath of Jesus). Since Paul was the most influential figure behind the rise of early christianity, then it goes without saying he had God on his side. Furthermore,

And when I inspired the disciples, (saying): Believe in Me and in My messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) "we are muslims".
(سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #111)


since GOD inspired the discples, then how can any muslim later argue that the disciples were led astray by Paul or lost to paul in commanding early christianity the right way?

ill tell you a story. i met a fakir once, a spiritual man, someone who came to me, found me and wanted me to follow him. He basically knew me, knew my story. We spoke for hours on our first meeting. Do you know how i decided on my next move? i asked him his opinion of paul and peter.
he told me the same old crap
'peter was led astray by iblees when he saw the vision in the cloud' 'paul was evil etc'
i decided right there that this man was a deception and was here for darker reasons. when i told him he was wrong, his entire demeanor changed and then he proceeded to try and verbally put me down.

Yet it was the Quran that provided my grounding. if i wasnt studying the quran i would not be backing anything else, i would simply be unsure, since my own 'logic' needed direction.

side story: the above verse was also misinterpreted by certain muslims deliberately and this 'help' they claim, is that Jesus asked them to help save him from the crucifixion. So one of them said 'yeh ill help you' and was transformed into Jesus's likeness. This played out when muslims forged a fake book called 'the gospel of barnabas'. So i have little regard for muslims most of the time. or at least muslims in the field of interfaith dialogue. that's why i act so different to them and do not behave like some pious muslim...but its also because i lost my patience with everyone and just dont suffer fools no more.



going back to Jude 1, if they were carnal people, then by faith they should have been saved ie by the power of the cross, apparent in that age of earlier christianity, their carnal nature should have died.
paul himself argued that the circumcision was DEAD (as a symbol of metaphysical transmutation) simply because the jews were sinners and very much carnal. so how could there then be carnal christians at all if the cross was a living symbol and not a dead one?

the fact there were is because they were never real christians. they were simply masquandering as christians, faking it.
if they were mere sinners, then theyu would be in need of God's grace and not to be scorned, yet...


Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people.
4 For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about[b] long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.


how do they deny Jesus?
just one example
Psalm 110, THE LORD/ADONAI (God/Yahweh) says to my lord/adoni(The messiah, Jesus).
Jesus quoted this to the pharisees himself, when they called him 'lord'. that is, adoni...and NOT Adonai.

so as soon as any so called christian starts insisting that 'lord/adoni' now means 'LORD GOD/ADONAI' then we have a problem. they are denying Jesus by elevating him to Godhead, when he isnt God.
Don't get me wrong, I differentiate between God's Trancendent nature and His Immanence. God was Immanent in Jesus when he 'emptied himself' but that doesnt mean Jesus was God. God's Immanence is in all things, doesnt make us panthiest/panenthiest ie we dont view everything as deity in the same way.

basically the xtians are pagans, fake christians who masquander as real ones. The mere denial of Jesus, no matter how you view rhis, means they could never have been true christians to begin with.
They denied Jesus through their actions and works(Titus 1:16). It has nothing to do with holding to the doctrine that Jesus is God.
 






Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,365
If there was no problem with the Torah and the Gospels (according to the prophet), then one must wonder why he added to them, knowing he would be cursed for doing so.
In John 16, Jesus said 'i have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear to hear them right now'.
He further said he would send the holy spirit to reveal ALL THE TRUTH AND TELL YOU WHAT IS YET TO COME.
Furthermore, the holy spirit was to 'speak only what he hears'
which directly kills the trinitarian pagan doctrine of 'co-equals in Godhead' ie the holy spirit is not equal to or greater than the Son, let alone GOD THE FATHER.
If you break it down further, the holy spirit functions through people anyway. So for the holy spirit to 'tell you ALL THE TRUTH AND TELLY OU WHAT IS YET TO COME' it literally means another revelation was incoming. Likewise 'only speak what he hears' is suggesting divine revelation.

Nowhere in the bible did it say there cannot be another revelation. Rather, that Jesus being the messiah and the capstone, it means there cannot be any jewish prophet or messiah after him. He is the end of that line.
"the sceptre shall not depart from judah, till Shiloh comes" ie the sceptre certain can leave judah (go to the gentiles) once Jesus has come.
It left clear cut room for a gentile prophet..and it made perfect sense that prophet would be an ishmaelite, fulfilling the promises on that end.

Here's an example of how this is broken down.
Paul, argued that the Patriarchs (Abraham to Joseph) were 'righteous by faith before there was a law'.
So think about this...at one point there was faith and no law. YET God decided to reveal a law. WHY?
first reason was that the israelites lost said 'faith' when they became pagan in egypt.
the second was on the merits of the law, it's purpose 'not revealed to conceal sin but to make it known, so God's grace could be revealed'.

now the gentiles of early christianity were similarly compared to the patriarchs ie 'righteous by faith'.
it is perfectly logical then that the gentiles would err, become pagan (this time in Rome) and then it would become necessary for the holy spirit to bring a religion with laws, just like Moses came with the Torah, yet this would have to be a gentile version.


Another example
in the parable of the tenants, Jesus spoke of the vineyard and the tenants. He told the jews that they would be kicked out as tenants and it would go to other people who would produce the fruits.
I am well aware of how xtians have concealed this by insisting this vienyard is 'the kingdom of God which is within and not a physical place', yet in isaiah 5, the vineyard in Jerusalem!!.
Now if you look at the past 2000 yrs, muslims controlled jerusalem for a period of 1260 lunar yrs...thus fulfilling Revelation 11.
It would be entirely wrong to assume islam is from satan or just made up, given islam has proven its legitimacy by taking control of the temple mount for that extent of time, longer than christianity (or xtianity for that matter) and longer than the israelites/jews did in their entire history (from David to Jesus and anything since then).

yet muslims have lost it too..and that goes in line with my own arguments against muslims ie literally writing the Quran with their own hands and ironically doing so with the very verse which itself highlights the people of scripture doing this very thing. it is so ironic.

Aside from all that, islam had a seperate story aswell. it dealt with the pagan world that the christian world didnt really touch. the arab peninsula, the east and africa.
notice how in isaiah 42 when it gets to the 'new song' part, the energy changes..?
the first 9 verses of isaiah 42 represent christianity and Jesus
and he will bring justice to the nations.
2 He will not shout or cry out,
or raise his voice in the streets.
3 A bruised reed he will not break,
and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out.
In faithfulness he will bring forth justice;


yet the new song prophecy, totally different
10 Sing to the Lord a new song,
his praise from the ends of the earth,
you who go down to the sea, and all that is in it,
you islands, and all who live in them.
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.
12 Let them give glory to the Lord
and proclaim his praise in the islands.
13 The Lord will march out like a champion,
like a warrior he will stir up his zeal;
with a shout he will raise the battle cry
and will triumph over his enemies.
14 “For a long time I have kept silent,
I have been quiet and held myself back.
But now, like a woman in childbirth,
I cry out, I gasp and pant.
15 I will lay waste the mountains and hills
and dry up all their vegetation;
I will turn rivers into islands
and dry up the pools.
16 I will lead the blind by ways they have not known,
along unfamiliar paths I will guide them;
I will turn the darkness into light before them
and make the rough places smooth.
These are the things I will do;
I will not forsake them.

17 But those who trust in idols,
who say to images, ‘You are our gods,’
will be turned back in utter shame.


if you study the rise of islam, this is exactly what it was.
the last bit ive highlighted is necessary ie ishmael was not forgotten and it is beautiful that it took Jesus, before ishmael was remembered again.

now consider what is in the Quran in light of the target audience. there's bound to be a different mythos.

To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;
(سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #48)


idk what you want from islam tbh. you just expect everyone to be christian and nothing more. neither Jesus nor the apostles ever argued against another religion per se. paul only argued against 'another Gospel', the Quran is not a gospel.

 






Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,365
They denied Jesus through their actions and works(Titus 1:16). It has nothing to do with holding to the doctrine that Jesus is God.
ive already highlighted the problem with that
if you deny Jesus through actions then the blame lies on the cross..it means the cross had no power of redemption, there was no grace. the common sinner could not benefit from faith in the cross.
paul argued that the cross as a living symbol and the circimcusion was a dead symbol based on their metaphysical transformational effects.


get a clue man. you guys are so slow at this.
 






Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,365
it makes sense that they would be sincere in their own beliefs but their beliefs would be wrong..and thus the Cross would not work on them. they would remain sinners.
because if their beliefs were correct then it means either the cross is dead, or Jesus is worthless.

one of the Quran's arguments against christianity of that era..was 'why are you broken into sects then, if God is with you?'
(and yes this also works against modern islam too).
 






Top