I realize there are very few adherents of JW beliefs present as members and any answers would most likely be the personal opinions of just a few people. Most of us here have very little knowledge of JWs and do not understand how they differ from other groups that call themselves Christian. I do realize that JWs do differ very much from the other denominations to such a large degree that many who call themselves Christian do not consider JWs to be Christians.
The sacrifice was made in order to satisfy God's own requirements of divine justice. Jesus' obedience to death also gave a perfect answer to Satan's taunting accusation that none of God's servants would choose to remain loyal to God when faced with trials.
In other words you believe justice was obtained by Jesus(as) bribing God(swt) with his life?
format_quote Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Jesus willingly offered himself.
He had the right to commit suicide by proxy? What gave Jesus(as) the right to offer himself as a sacrifice?
format_quote Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Jesus paid the price (his life).
Then why do people still have to obey Gos(swt). the price was paid. No further need for humans to worship God(swt).
In his introduction to his translation of the Bible, J. B. Rotheram says this on page 26:
"Yahweh is almost always regarded as the third person, singular, masculine, imperfect tense, from the root hawah, an old form of the root hayah. The one meaning of hawah is "become." So that the force of yahweh thus derived, as a verb, would be "He will become"".
God actually explains the meaning of his name in Exodus 3:14. Moses has just asked: "surely they [the sons of Israel] will say unto me-- What is his name? What shall I say unto them?" God then replies: "I Will Become whatsoever I please".
The Israelites were suffering under the tyranny of the Egyptians as their slaves. They seemed to have no helper. But God here promised that he would become everything that they needed for their deliverance. And then, in a mighty way, God did rescue them and proved true to both his promise and his name.
indeed third person for 'he' not to become-- we can go over this extensively but we'll get nowhere given that you have NO/ZERO knowledge of Semitic languages! ..
it is interesting that 'oh he' helped those enslaved Israelite and in return they stole Egyptian gold and then used it to build a golden calf which they took for their god, upon which they not only incurred god's wrath but were lost in a small stretch of land for nearly half a century.. compare that with the dissolution of a 300 year old mighty Persian empire in exactly 19 days to Islam.. Surely if God loved a people and favored them, they'd not only be taken pagan idols for worship but they wouldn't be lost either for a prolonged period of time aimless and purposeless.. God helps those who are faithful and those who walk aright!
Only Islam offers that!
all the best
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
And a report from the Worldwatch Institute states: "Three times as many people fell victim to war in [the 20th] century as in all the wars from the first century AD to 1899."
Well, you are one up on me in being able to find your sources. But I have heard/read what I reported from legitimate sources as well. Should I stumble across it again, I will try to remember this thread to share it with you.
The sacrifice was made in order to satisfy God's own requirements of divine justice. Jesus' obedience to death also gave a perfect answer to Satan's taunting accusation that none of God's servants would choose to remain loyal to God when faced with trials.
Jesus willingly offered himself.
Jesus paid the price (his life).
[to] God.
You almost sound like Martin Luther here. Though I honestly think that Luther took Anselm's arguments a bit too far.
Last edited by Grace Seeker; 10-07-2010 at 08:27 PM.
Well, I have read a number of accounts in the Qur'an where unbelievers express doubt that God could ever restore the dead to life. But The assurance is then given that he can. And this is never on the basis of man having an immortal soul. The Qur'an nowhere speaks of an immortal soul.
Off hand I can not recall if or how many times it is stated that "unbelievers express doubt that God could ever restore the dead to life" but that does make sense. I think it would be safe to assume many unbelievers do believe that.
Now about your claim the soul not being mentioned in the Qur'an------ one example:
23. The Believers (Al-Müminün) 103. But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls, in Hell will they abide.
Looking back at the history of the Abrahamic teachings I believe you will find that the belief in an eternal soul was and still is believed by the Jews. This would have been a very common belief, well known and taught in the synagogues at the the time Jesus(as) walked the streets of Jerusalem. If that is a wrong teaching, doesn't it make sense that at some point Jesus(as) would have addressed this belief and corrected it? No where is it shown that Jesus(as) disagreed with this belief of an immortal soul.
Off hand I can not recall if or how many times it is stated that "unbelievers express doubt that God could ever restore the dead to life" but that does make sense. I think it would be safe to assume many unbelievers do believe that.
Correction brother Woodrow. It is mentioned several times. This was a main point of contention with the pagans of Quraish and something that even non-beleivers of today doubt about .
For example surah Qaf about the fourth or fifth ayah.
Correction brother Woodrow. It is mentioned several times. This was a main point of contention with the pagans of Quraish and something that even non-beleivers of today doubt about .
For example surah Qaf about the fourth or fifth ayah.
I was quite certain I had read so in the Qur'an. But was uncertain as to in what Surahs. I posted as I did to avoid making an error. Jazakalluh Khairan for the verification, you are correct.
From Surah 50 al-Qaf
2. Nay, they wonder that there has come to them a warner (Muhammad ) from among themselves. So the disbelievers say: "This is a strange thing!
3. "When we are dead and have become dust (shall we be resurrected?) That is a far return."
4. We know that which the earth takes of them (their dead bodies), and with Us is a Book preserved (i.e. the Book of Decrees).
5. Nay, but they have denied the truth (this Qur'an) when it has come to them, so they are in a confused state (can not differentiate between right and wrong).
6. Have they not looked at the heaven above them, how We have made it and adorned it, and there are no rifts in it?
7. And the earth! We have spread it out, and set thereon mountains standing firm, and have produced therein every kind of lovely growth (plants).
8. An insight and a Reminder for every slave turning to Allah (i.e. the one who believes in Allah and performs deeds of His obedience, and always begs His pardon).
9. And We send down blessed water (rain) from the sky, then We produce therewith gardens and grain (every kind of harvests) that are reaped.
10. And tall date-palms, with ranged clusters;
11. A provision for (Allah's) slaves. And We give life therewith to a dead land. Thus will be the resurrection (of the dead).
12. Denied before them (i.e. these pagans of Makkah who denied you, O Muhammad ) the people of Nuh (Noah), and the dwellers of Rass, and the Thamud,
13. And 'Ad, and Fir'aun (Pharaoh), and the brethren of Lout (Lot),
So, Woodrow, what have you learned of JWs from Hiroshi?
There a many Muslims on this board who speak of JWs as if they were just another Christian sect. There are Muslims who speak of JWs as if they were somehow a remnant believing what Muslims conceptualize the first generations of disciples to have taught. I've been ridiculed when I've objected to either portrayal as not consistent with the facts. Now that you have more facts than before, what say you?
Are JWs just another Christian sect?
Do JWs believe what you understand Jesus' disciples would have taught?
Or are they really something unique of their own creation fitting poorly into historical consonance with any prior faith community?
So, Woodrow, what have you learned of JWs from Hiroshi?
There a many Muslims on this board who speak of JWs as if they were just another Christian sect. There are Muslims who speak of JWs as if they were somehow a remnant believing what Muslims conceptualize the first generations of disciples to have taught. I've been ridiculed when I've objected to either portrayal as not consistent with the facts. Now that you have more facts than before, what say you?
Are JWs just another Christian sect?
Do JWs believe what you understand Jesus' disciples would have taught?
Or are they really something unique of their own creation fitting poorly into historical consonance with any prior faith community?
Peace Gene,
Out of kindness and to avoid having to ban myself I will only say is JWs are not part of any other religious group and are a very recent innovation. They definitely are not Christian in the concept of what I understand Christianity to be. While I do disagree with Christianity, I do not think it is right to compare JWs with Christianity. It is an error to categorize JWs as Christians. I do disagree with JWs but for different reasons than I disagree with Christians.
Thank-you, Woodrow, for simply and directly answering the question. I didn't expect you to give up your objections to Christianity. I suspect we will continue to debate that for a long time to come. But I just might bookmark and save the other portion of your comment:
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
They [JWs] definitely are not Christian in the concept of what I understand Christianity to be. While I do disagree with Christianity, I do not think it is right to compare JWs with Christianity. It is an error to categorize JWs as Christians.
indeed third person for 'he' not to become-- we can go over this extensively but we'll get nowhere given that you have NO/ZERO knowledge of Semitic languages! ..
Most translations of the Bible do not render Exodus 3:14 as: "I Will Become" or similar but rather as "I Am" copying the King James. You know why? It is because Jesus says: "I am" at John 8:58 and trinitarians try to make it seem that he was quoting Exodus 3:14 and claiming to be God.
format_quote Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
it is interesting that 'oh he' helped those enslaved Israelite and in return they stole Egyptian gold and then used it to build a golden calf which they took for their god, upon which they not only incurred god's wrath but were lost in a small stretch of land for nearly half a century.. compare that with the dissolution of a 300 year old mighty Persian empire in exactly 19 days to Islam.. Surely if God loved a people and favored them, they'd not only be taken pagan idols for worship but they wouldn't be lost either for a prolonged period of time aimless and purposeless.. God helps those who are faithful and those who walk aright!
Only Islam offers that!
all the best
God surely became disgusted with the Israelites at that time.
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Yes Abraham is already in hell. Even Jesus went to hell when he died. Acts 2:27 KJV says (speaking of Jesus): "thou wilt not leave my soul in hell" and Acts 2:31 KJV says: "his soul was not left in hell". Jesus went to hell (as we all will) but he was not left there. The dead come out of hell in the resurrection. Revelation 20:13 KJV says: "death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them". Hell means "the grave" in all of these scriptures. We all go to our grave..
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
The "soul" is the person. When the person dies he becomes a dead soul. The Bible often refers to a dead body as a dead soul. The wording of Acts 2:27 "you will not leave my soul in hell" refers to a dead body (soul) in the grave (hell).
this is so confusing ...Sub`haan Allah...hell means grave and soul means body...
would you please explain for me, why to call the grave (hell)?
Was Abraham a believer? Yes he was, of course.
What was Abraham's calling? What do you want me to say? He was a prophet. He was called "Jehovah's friend". He had unshakeable faith. And he was the father of great nations thanks to a miracle of God, giving him a son in his old age
yes, but I really wanted you to tell me what was his message ...
Do you believe that God come to earth in a human form?(Astagfero Allah Al Atheem )...
From what did God create Adam? was Adam in Paradise?and how did Adam come to earth?(peace be upon him)
Why do Christians call themselves Christians? and do you consider yourself a Christian?
Thank you my brother for your patience and kindness...
Off hand I can not recall if or how many times it is stated that "unbelievers express doubt that God could ever restore the dead to life" but that does make sense. I think it would be safe to assume many unbelievers do believe that.
Now about your claim the soul not being mentioned in the Qur'an------ one example:
23. The Believers (Al-Müminün) 103. But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls, in Hell will they abide.
Surah 23:103 says:
But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls, in Hell will they abide.
Waman khaffat mawazeenuhu faola-ikaallatheena khasiroo anfusahum fee jahannama khalidoona
Now Insaanah has severely chided me for citing a verse that says "every soul shall taste death" because the Arabic word for "soul" in that verse was "nafs" when she said it had to be "ruh".
Are you sure that "anfusahum" here doesn't just mean "persons" rather than "spirits"?
the definition of Nafs vs. rooh was given to you by my person with a link to the dictionary for your convenience. Would you like us to render a meaning that caters better to your personal beliefs?
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
the definition of Nafs vs. rooh was given to you by my person with a link to the dictionary for your convenience. Would you like us to render a meaning that caters better to your personal beliefs?
If you and your dictionary disagree with Insaanah why are you complaining to me?
maybe you can show me how me and my dictionary disagree with Sr. Insaanah?
all the best
Maybe you can. She said in her wisdom:
Hiroshi, I am just entering this thread quickly, with no intention of further replies to any of your posts, to say that the ignorance and arrogance that you are currently displaying, is staggering. Are you here to learn about Islam, or to teach us it? If the latter, then I don't need to say the words. If the former, then please dispense with your pearls of wisdom. They are not needed or wanted. Please do not tell us we are wrong without having knowledge of our religion, the language of our book and everything else. The Arabic word used is nafs. This word is used for mainly person, and self, mainly in the plural, all over the Qur'an, as anfus, mainly as anfusakum, meaning yourselves. Ruh is the word used for the soul which is in the body. The way the word "soul" is used in this translation is for a person, eg when you say to someone, "Oh, you're such a good soul" - everyone knows that is referring to the person.
And you know, I am sure that she is absolutely right.
But now Woodrow has quoted a verse which says:
Surah 23:103
But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls, in Hell will they abide.
Waman khaffat mawazeenuhu faola-ikaallatheena khasiroo anfusahum fee jahannama khalidoona
So if "anfusakum" means "persons" or "yourselves" as Insaanah explains, then Surah 23:103 is simply saying that these ones have lost themselves or are lost (which makes perfect sense here). It doesn't say that they have immortal souls. Am I right?
Hiroshi, I am just entering this thread quickly, with no intention of further replies to any of your posts, to say that the ignorance and arrogance that you are currently displaying, is staggering. Are you here to learn about Islam, or to teach us it? If the latter, then I don't need to say the words. If the former, then please dispense with your pearls of wisdom. They are not needed or wanted. Please do not tell us we are wrong without having knowledge of our religion, the language of our book and everything else. The Arabic word used is nafs. This word is used for mainly person, and self, mainly in the plural, all over the Qur'an, as anfus, mainly as anfusakum, meaning yourselves. Ruh is the word used for the soul which is in the body. The way the word "soul" is used in this translation is for a person, eg when you say to someone, "Oh, you're such a good soul" - everyone knows that is referring to the person.
And you know, I am sure that she is absolutely right.
But now Woodrow has quoted a verse which says:
Surah 23:103
But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls, in Hell will they abide.
Waman khaffat mawazeenuhu faola-ikaallatheena khasiroo anfusahum fee jahannama khalidoona
So if "anfusakum" means "persons" or "yourselves" as Insaanah explains, then Surah 23:103 is simply saying that these ones have lost themselves or are lost (which makes perfect sense here). It doesn't say that they have immortal souls. Am I right?
I really can't see any problem here.
Since hell is eternal then those who enter into hell have lost both themselves and souls
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
Originally Posted by Hiroshi 
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks