Atonement

  • Thread starter Thread starter POBook
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 166
  • Views Views 27K
Hello and Peace PrIM3:

Not to worry, I didn't think you were being rude at all. :) I hope you're feeling better soon, inshallah.

Army of One means they work together--- again notice the plurallity of this word ONE when one person isn't able to do a job by himself.
Sorry, PrIM3, but you are not understanding that phrase. To say an army of one, it means you are describing a person so dedicated and loyal to a cause (as an example) that they perform the job of an entire army. ie: PrIM3 is an army of one. One person, perfoming a mulititude of functions.

However, even if we took your understanding, it won't work because you're saying you need all these people to do the job to make the army whole and operate properly. By saying that, you're saying no one can operate independently because if you break the whole, the army fails to perform as it did. Meaning it has become less than what it is. Which again, proves the trinitarian concept won't work.

And, no, you don't have to come up with another analogy....you won't find one that will work anyway.

Yes actually it does matter what you belief of them.. are they Laws of Love or are they Laws of Restrictions?
Nope, it does't matter to me at all. I don't hold the bible as God's word. The bible is not my guide, it is yours. My guide is the Holy Qur'an. I follow the word's of God as He, Himself, revealed them to mankind. The things God has made Halal (permissable) or Haram (Forbidden), are listed in the Qur'an. What do I think of the commands in the Qur'an? Anything forbidden to us is to protect us from harm. It is not because He is trying to restrict pleasure, etc. Anything He has made Halal is because it is for our benefit.

POBook, in a previous post, already admitted there was a contradiction:
You can point out a contradiction but you cannot use the contradiction itself to make a determination of what is right or what is wrong.

As I explained to him, I don't have to decide if one is wrong or both are wrong. The one thing for sure is that one is wrong, yet it is written in your book as "the word of God". It's not me that has to determine which, if any, are correct. My salvation doesn't depend on it....yours does. Even if one were true, it still doesn't change the fact that the other is a lie and you are being told it came from God, Astagfirallah. Jesus, pbuh, has already told you how too obtain paradise...obey the laws. It's not complicated.

Take care and peace,
Hana
 
Hello Hana,

One last time…and let me use another example to try and explain what I am saying. In your message # 27 you made the following statement:

“Yes, Jesus, phuh, was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel.” In #27

In Matthew 10:6 Jesus says to his disciples, “Instead, go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Now, in your statement above you are agreeing with this verse, am I right? That’s all I want to know right now.

Sincerely,

PS. In your response to PrIM3 you quoted me as saying there is a contradiction in the Bible. Please understand the context of what we were talking about. You are the one saying there are contradictions. I'm trying to address this issue from your perspective. Accurate Biblical interpretation requires contextual consideration before coming to conclusions. Within the context of these two verses, there is no contradiction.
 
Thank you for your reply POBook

"For as Jonah was THREE days and THREE nights in the whale's belly; so shall the son of man be THREE days and THREE nights in the heart of the earth."

As it is led to believe that Jesus (pbuh) died on a friday hence people celebrate good friday and then Mary Magdalene saw him on the first day of the week which is sunday then the maths just does not add up.

Friday=1 night
Saturday=1 day and 1 night

Now if you add them up you will get 1 day and 2 nights which does not equal 3 days and 3 nights and Jesus (pbuh) was not discovered on the third day. However somehow assuming that the above verses are true this still does not mean Jesus (pbuh) was dead, when Jonah (pbuh) spent 3 days and 3 nights in the whale's body he was still alive and therefore for the above verses to be true Jesus (pbuh) must have still been alive.

Also may i ask why did Mary Magdalene go to visit Jesus' (pbuh) tomb? According to the Gospel writers she went "TO ANOINT HIM", Mark 16:1 The Hebrew word for anoint is "masaha" which basically means to rub, ro massage to anoint. Now why would a woman want to go and massage a dead body? After 3 hours of a person being dead rigor mortis sets in and the body starts to decompose so if someone tried massaging a dead body after 3 days it would fall to pieces! It would however make sense if she was looking for a live person, you see she was about the the only person besides Joseph of Arimathe'a and Nicodemus who had given the final rites to the body of Jesus. If she had seen any sign of life in the limp body of Jesus when he was taken down from the cross, she was not going to shout, "HE IS ALIVE!" She returns after 2 nights and a day, when the Jewish Sabbath had passed, to take care of Jesus.

About the stone which covered the tomb, now if Jesus really was a spirit then surely he could walk straight out of the tomb without having to move the stone and if it was to make people believe that he has truly risen from the dead then would it not be better if the stone was not moved? If he walked through the stone it would prove that he risen from the dead as no live human being can walk through physical barriers. Also if people saw Jesus then they could easily go and check the tomb as it was not too heavy to move as one man himself could move it "HE (Joseph of Arimathea) rolled a stone against the door of the tomb" (Mark 15:46).


"When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything?" And they said, "Nothing."
Then said he unto them, "But now, he that hath no purse, let him take it, and likewise his bag; and he that hath no SWORD, let him sell his garment and buy one!"
(Luke 22:35-36)

". . . Lord, behold, here are two SWORDS." And he said unto them, "It is enough".
(Luke 22:38)

These sound like a physical sword to me and it seems that Jesus wanted to defend himself but if he knew what was going to come and was going to sacrifice himself then why the need for defence?

Why did Jesus go there to pray? Surely if he is God then why the need to pray to himself?

"And he went a little further, and fell on his face and prayed, saying, 'O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt'." (Matthew 26:37-39)

"And being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat was, as it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground."
(Luke 22:44)

If Jesus knew his job was to sacrifice himself for the peoples sins then why all this worrying? Plus as he is 'God' he shouldn't be worried about what other people are going to do him.

If Jesus is really 'God' then how he have ancestors? "The generations of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." (Matthew, 1:1) "Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne." (Acts, 2:30)

"And in the morning, rising up a great while before day, he went out, and departed into a solitary place, and there prayed." (Mark, 1:35) Who is Jesus praying to if he is 'God'?

"Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, THE SON OF JOSEPH," (John, 1:45) Does this mean that Jesus had two fathers?

"I can of mine own self do nothing." (John, 5:30) If Jesus is 'God' then surely he should be able to do anything, right?

"But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew, 15:24) Does this mean that the only meant to follow Jesus was meant to be the people of Israel and not the world?

"And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, STRENGTHENING him." (Luke, 22:43) Isn't God all powerful? Then why does he need an angel strengthening him?
 
Hello Tahir and peace to you.

well about the days.. back then they did not count time like we did. days were alot different..
if Jesus was in the tomb part of friday then the whole sabbath day then saturday then sunday. it would surely be 3 days.. even if the body was in the tomb for 1 whole day and 2 whole nights they still counted it as 3 days.

according to this book.. but before I do qoute from it.. I just want to ask if I can?

thanks.. and God bless you

PrIM3
 
Hello and Peace PrIM3:

Not to worry, I didn't think you were being rude at all. :) I hope you're feeling better soon, inshallah.


Sorry, PrIM3, but you are not understanding that phrase. To say an army of one, it means you are describing a person so dedicated and loyal to a cause (as an example) that they perform the job of an entire army. ie: PrIM3 is an army of one. One person, perfoming a mulititude of functions.

However, even if we took your understanding, it won't work because you're saying you need all these people to do the job to make the army whole and operate properly. By saying that, you're saying no one can operate independently because if you break the whole, the army fails to perform as it did. Meaning it has become less than what it is. Which again, proves the trinitarian concept won't work.

And, no, you don't have to come up with another analogy....you won't find one that will work anyway.


Nope, it does't matter to me at all. I don't hold the bible as God's word. The bible is not my guide, it is yours. My guide is the Holy Qur'an. I follow the word's of God as He, Himself, revealed them to mankind. The things God has made Halal (permissable) or Haram (Forbidden), are listed in the Qur'an. What do I think of the commands in the Qur'an? Anything forbidden to us is to protect us from harm. It is not because He is trying to restrict pleasure, etc. Anything He has made Halal is because it is for our benefit.


Take care and peace,
Hana

Hello Hana--- how are you doing?

I would like to post these rules about our religion: it is How I know I am a Christian.. so you can get a better meaning of what we should and should not do if I can.. I don't want to go off topic.. but of course the trinity I guess is not on this topic.. and I am deeply sorry for that.. though I did see someone have a post about the trinity so I posted anyway.. but I do have another analogy.. though it is up to you to reject it or not I can't push you to go out on the limb and trust someone you don't want to trust..

We believe that this one God-- communicated to us through three different essence. in a way it is like communication we do today...
there is the Phone ( the Father ), communication in person ( The Son ), then communication through the Letter ( the Spirit )..
now all three is a way of this one person to get a hold of us...

God Bless you..
 
Hey PrIM3

go for it you can quote from the book, not like i can stop you anyways lol

ok thanks... like I said before---but the book explains a little better

"the expression one day and one night was an idiom employed by the jews for indicating a day even when only part of a day was indicated.
in 1 samuel 30:12-13.. then in Genesis 42:17-18.. He releases them all on the third day."

thank you agian tahir
God bless you
 
Hello POBook:
In Matthew 10:6 Jesus says to his disciples, “Instead, go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Now, in your statement above you are agreeing with this verse, am I right? That’s all I want to know right now.

I told you that was what YOUR book said....whether I believe it or not makes absolutely no difference whatsoever. If I said I'm reading a book that claims everything in it is true and it says, "Fuzzy Wuzzy was a bear" does that mean I believe it? It doesn't make it a wrong statement either. But, if 2 chapters later it said, "Fuzzy Wuzzy was a goldfish." Then you have 2 possibilities: 1. One of the statements is a lie or; 2. Both statements are a lie. But for sure BOTH cannot be the truth.

THAT is logic and THAT is my whole point.

POBook, you are trying to avoid the topic we were discussing because you have seen clear contradictions and you don't know how to respond or explain them. I don't play word games or twist text. I call it like I see it using logic. You are intentionally trying to play with words and use circular logic....when that doesn't work, you pretend you don't know how to properly question the authenticity of a book that you claim contains nothing but truth and the words of God. I could use hundreds of outside sources to prove my point and what excuse would you have then? You made the claims that the Bible is the word of God, I don't have to believe it, I only need prove that what you claim is wrong based on other verses from the same book. I do believe I did that as well as the other brothers and sisters that have participated so diligently in this thread.

The ball is in your court, POBook. You have been shown, clearly, the Bible cannot be the word of God, unless of course you believe God makes mistakes, Astagfirallah. Now it's up to you to search the truth for yourself.

May Allah, swt, guide you and bring you to that truth. Ameen

Respectfully,
Hana
 
Hey PrIM3, i didn't fully understand the expression from the book, could you please explain it? Thanks
 
Hello PrIM3 and Peace:

Hello Hana--- how are you doing?
Alhamdulillah (All thanks be to Allah), I am doing great, ty for asking. How are you?

I can't push you to go out on the limb and trust someone you don't want to trust..

It's not a matter of trust, PrIM3, it's totally a matter of logic.

We believe that this one God-- communicated to us through three different essence. in a way it is like communication we do today...
there is the Phone ( the Father ), communication in person ( The Son ), then communication through the Letter ( the Spirit )..
You're actually closer to the truth here than you realize.

God did use different resources to communicate. 1. God, is the knower of ALL things. 2. He sent Moses, Jesus, Muhammed, etc. (pbuta), as prophets and messengers. HE communicated through them to give us His message. 3. The "letter" is the Qur'an. The word of God, recorded, exactly how it was recited and protected for all time.

PrIM3, please keep learning, ask questions, use logic and put what you believe to be true aside and try to look at things with an open mind. Try to learn as if you're learning it for the first time. Then, just ask yourself, "Does this makes sense? Is this the word of God or the word of Man?" Do this regardless of the Holy Book you are reading.

Peace to you,
Hana
 
Last edited:
Greetings Ansar Al-'Adl,

If I may, I would like to take a different approach to our dialogue concerning the Trinity.

“Praise be Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth, and made the darkness and the light. Yet those who reject Faith hold (others) as equal, with their Guardian-Lord” -- Al-Anaam 1 (Sura 6:1)."

What is your definition or understanding of creation?

“I could paste Muslim commentary of these verses but I think it would be more beneficial if you picked one that you felt strongly supported the divinity of Christ and then we analyzed that specific verse.”
I will choose one.

“Why would they say that? Weren't they supposed to kill Jesus? Wasn't that the purpose of his coming to earth? What do you mean they would say, "we had no time to decide" ? Decide about what?”
No one was supposed to kill Jesus. If someone was supposed to kill Jesus, that would imply that Jesus was guilty of some crime and deserved a payment or retribution for that crime. If you said, “Wasn’t Jesus supposed to die?” I would agree with you. Death was the payment of sin. Did GOD allow people to kill Jesus? Yes, He allowed it. Did He implement it? No.

The purpose of His coming to earth was to pay the ultimate price for our sin and create a way for us to have eternal life. His purpose was to sacrifice His life. In His foreknowledge, GOD knew how Jesus would die. The decision people needed to make was the decision to follow Jesus. Many people understood that Jesus was the Son of GOD; they chose to follow Him. Many others did not understand who He was and why He came. They accused Him of blasphemy and finally crucified Him. They had heard the message of salvation but chose not to follow Him and His Gospel. Instead, they decided to kill Him.

Quote:
GOD did not have to die.
But God had to die in order to forgive His creation?

Yes, GOD did have to die in order to forgive His creation. There is a difference, however, between these two statements. GOD did not have to forgive His creation and in that sense, He did not have to die. He chose, however, to make a way for us to have eternal life. Once He made this choice, yes, then He had to die. His having to die was part of His plan for our salvation. GOD was abiding by His own laws that He implemented.

“Once again, you're nitpicking with words. By saying that God wanted to die, I'm not saying that He desired death, but that He intended to die.”
I realize that I am being a bit nitpicky but I would rather err on the side of caution. Yes, GOD intended to die and was willing to die. I was responding, I think, to the “GOD wanting to be killed” idea. There is a vast difference between wanting to be killed and willing to die.

“No forgiveness? Numbers 14:20 seems to disagree with you.”
What’s your opinion concerning Numbers 14:21-23?

“Unfortunately, you still did not answer my question. My question is, once again:
Quote:
So from a Christian perspective, there is now no difference between a pious Christian and a mass-murder and rapist. Both will go to paradise because God has paid for their sins. People should have fun and do whatever they like in this world, sinning as much as possible, because God has paid for their sins.”
Please specifically tell me what will be the fate of a mass-murderer and rapist in the afterlife. How can you say 'Hell' when God has already paid for his sin? it means that God did not really pay for his sins because now he has to be punished for them again.”

People who sin as much as possible are people who have continued on the road to hell. They are people who have not truly confessed their sin to GOD from their hearts; who have not truly been sorry for their sin; who have not been willing to truly acknowledge themselves as sinful and who have not truly accepted the gift of forgiveness through Jesus Christ. A mass-murderer and rapist who truly come to an understanding of their sinful nature and humbly come before GOD, committing themselves wholeheartedly to Him; confessing Jesus as Lord and Savior will experience GOD’s forgiveness. When Jesus hung on the cross He prayed, “Father, forgive them, because they do not know what they are doing”. Forgiveness is not imposed on us. It is offered to us to accept or reject. People who reject GOD’s forgiveness choose the road to hell. Allow me to say this again. Before GOD brought “into effect” His way of salvation for us, there was no other road other than the road to hell. His forgiveness of our sin entitled Him to open a road to eternal life. By nature, we are sinful. We all travel the road to hell. Now we have a choice. Stay on this road or follow Jesus, the new road to eternal life. Because the price for our sin has been paid, we no longer have to go to hell. Through His grace, mercy, and love, GOD has offered us the free road to heaven. We can choose to take this road or we can choose to take the road to hell. We now have a choice.

“What constitutes a rejection and what constitutes an acceptance of His forgiveness?”
Allow me to explain. You used the term “pious Christian” earlier. Again, true Christianity is not pious by nature. However, many Christians struggle with the issue of piety—so do many Muslims; so do all people of the world. No one likes to admit they are wrong. Many times we may know we are wrong about something, but we are not going to confess that; we are not going to accept that. The sinful human nature goes against the willing and humble attitude and mindset of acknowledging, accepting, and confessing we are sinful by nature. Acceptance of forgiveness can only take place when we recognize and then acknowledge, accept, and confess that we are sinful. As long as we believe and think we are not sinful by nature; as long as we recognize our sinful nature but refuse to humble ourselves and confess our sin, we cannot accept forgiveness. As long as we keep justifying our actions and behavior; as long as we keep justifying our nature, we cannot accept forgiveness. True acceptance of forgiveness buries our piety and pride. It buries excuses; it buries our mindset of being good enough for GOD. When this happens, the way of forgiveness is truly accepted. Rejection involves rejecting the ideas and the principles and the truths about who we are as people by nature. Many people will say, “Yes, I have confessed my sin to GOD and asked His forgiveness, so I will go to heaven.” Often, however, this is said and done so that people can say that their salvation and way to heaven has been an amazing accomplishment on their own. This will never work. This is a form of rejection and piety that dishonors GOD greatly. GOD does not listen to words we say; He does not watch deeds we do. GOD searches the heart and examines our motives.

“Tell me about the innocent human babies who were murdered throughout history - what sin did they do?”
These babies did not commit any sin. But they, like every other baby in the world, were born with a sinful nature—a natural tendency toward sin. At their age, they do not understand what sin is. A point in time comes when they know the difference between right and wrong. This is when they will be accountable.

“Why is that? If God has forgiven every single sin you did and will do in your life, and has even punished himself for it, then He cannot reasonably hold you accountable for it. It does not make sense for him to punish you after He has already died for your sins. What about those Christians who murdered and slaughtered innocent people (like the Crusaders) yet still accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour. According to Christianity, these people will not be punished for the tremendous atrocities they committed because God already died for their sins.”
GOD will not hold us accountable for our sin. The price was paid. What GOD is going to hold us accountable for is our acceptance or rejection of His forgiveness. You are right, GOD will not punish. If GOD punishes then His forgiveness is of no effect. We, however, will implement punishment on ourselves. Just like there is eternal life in heaven, there is eternal life in hell. We now decide to which one we want to go. Many, many people call themselves Christians. In the name of Christianity they murdered people. Crusaders were not true followers of Jesus Christ. Christianity is not a religion about violence, retribution, and pay back. True Christianity—biblical born again Christianity—is about forgiveness, love, servitude, perfect moral and ethical standards, and grace. Crusaders did not implement true Christianity in their lives. People who truly accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, are people who become “born-again.” They no longer have desires to sin; they no longer have a pious and proud attitude; they desire in the depths of their heart to follow Jesus at all costs. People who continue to commit atrocities are people rejecting GOD’s forgiveness and continuing down the road to hell.

“If God paid for future sins as well, as you believe, then there should be no blame on the Christian who decides to lead a sinful life.”
Again, someone who chooses to lead a sinful life, is someone who has not accepted GOD’s forgiveness from the heart. Someone choosing to lead a sinful life is not a true Christian; is not a true born again believer; is not a true follower of Jesus. The desire to lead a sinful life has died in the life of true Christians. People who have this desire, are not true Christians at all. They may go by the name of Christian; they may attend church every week; they may give money to the poor—but those things do not make them true born again believers. Christianity to them is simply a religion about GOD and not a relationship with GOD.

“So which sins are they allowed to do and which sins are they not allowed to do?”
True Christians are not allowed to do any sins—they have no desire to sin. Again, please allow me to quote the apostle Paul in Romans 6:1, “What should we say then? Should we continue in sin [breaking the law] in order that grace may multiply? Absolutely not! How can we who died to sin still live in it?” GOD’s standard is that of perfection. What He has done for us does not give us the right to do as we please. If we still have the desire to sin, we are not true Christians. Does this mean Christians are perfect people. No! But we no longer have desires to sin. We no longer feel it’s OK to commit one or two sins.

“Quote:
True born-again Christians have a change of lifestyle that intrigues many people.
Why could God not give people this change of lifestyle without having to die Himself?”
God does not impose this change of lifestyle on people. When we recognize ourselves for who we truly are as sinful human beings; when we recognize GOD for who He is as the Almighty, Holy, Creator of this Universe, our eyes are suddenly opened to see and understand the great divide between ourselves and GOD—a divide that we cannot cross on our own. At this point, the natural inclination is to say that yes, we deserve to go straight to hell. Then on top of that, we see and understand that this Holy, Almighty Creator of the Universe, against whom we sinned, actually came to this earth to sacrifice Himself on our behalf as sinful people—to pay the price for our sin against Him—this becomes the most humbling experience. People who are willing to put their pride in their pocket and acknowledge their sinful human nature and then truly accept this gift, are people who literally die to themselves and become alive to Jesus. Without this Almighty Creator doing what He did for His creation, people would never be able to see themselves for who they truly are by nature—sinful human beings that deserve absolutely nothing from GOD—nothing at all!

Once again, thanks for your feedback and continuing dialogue.

Sincerely,
 
Greetings once again Hana_Aku,

“When John says that the soldiers "saw" He was dead, he means that they assumed.”
Here you have changed a text of Scripture in support of your view. You also chose to use some commentary in support of changing the meaning of the text.

“"they all forsook him and fled." (Mark 14:50).”
Here you have kept a text of Scripture the same in support of your view. If we can change the first text of scripture, then can we not change the second text? Who's to say which one is right and which one is wrong? Why not simply change the second text to mean something different and leave the first one the same? Or, why not simply change them both? Or, why not keep them for what they are and look at context to gain a better understanding of the texts?

Sincerely,
 
Greetings Sumay28,

I realize this response has taken some time. Thanks for your patience.

In your message #71, you said:
“Pauline authorship of Philippians is "universally accepted" by virtually all Bible scholars, ancient and modern, with the exception of the kenosis passage in Philippians 2:5-11. This may have been an early Christian hymn that Paul quoted, rather than an original Pauline composition. Thank you Mr. Encyclopedia.

And Mr Dictionary lol... Kenosis: The relinquishment of the form of God by Jesus in becoming man and suffering death.”

What’s your point?

“Might as well show them their own book, because it does have a ring of truth in it. But it contradicts itself like no tomorrow…”
Please point out a contradiction for me.

Thanks:) !!
 
God did use different resources to communicate. 1. God, is the knower of ALL things. 2. He sent Moses, Jesus, Muhammed, etc. (pbuta), as prophets and messengers. HE communicated through them to give us His message. 3. The "letter" is the Qur'an. The word of God, recorded, exactly how it was recited and protected for all time.


Peace to you,
Hana

well I did not mean it from like that.... the Phone (the Father) which before people dreamed or had visions of the God speaking. then the in person which is the Son which God spoke through Him.. then the Letter which the Holy Spirit (God speaks to us through ).
please allow me to write something that God told me about last night.. though I did not check it to see if it is alright to say though I will say:

Don't you think if God has raised Christ from the grave that He to will do the same for you for following Him ( Jesus Christ )?

I used to be in bootcamp and they all stated that if one-falls then we all fall. like in football if one steals but yet doesn't confess we all pay the price because we are all one as a team. one cannot boast about being better because one does not complete the job Jesus never boasted about being God directly but he did say that he had power over things no one else did is one of the signs.
Jesus was at the beginning the Son of God but moses was appointed during his life time.



I would like to ask you if I can write down something... that tells a Christian that he is definiately a Christian? though if you want I can start another thread but before I do I want to ask if I can.
 
Greetings to you Hana_Aku,

I have quoted your entire message just to refresh your memory.

“I apologize for jumping in on your conversation but I wanted to comment to POBook about this. First YOU believe every word written in the Bible, we as Muslims do not. The parts that agree with the Qur'an we believe, of course. You don't believe the Qur'an at all, so no point in refuting the Bible using the Qur'an. When we, as Muslims, use your own quotes from the Bible, we are using them to show you the contradictions and errors. Can you think of a better way to refute something than using the same words you hold as "gospel" truth.

When you quote from the Bible and say, "This is true because it's in the Bible" What is wrong with someone finding another verse that contradicts and then ask, "If that is true, how can this also be true?" It doesn't mean that person believes in the verse, it means they are pointing to reasons why they can't believe or have reasons to believe there are untruths or errors within the pages of this book of "God's word". If you are shown clear errors and contradictions, as the Christian, you might want to find out why. As Muslims, we already know why.

In the same way, I can ask you why you are using the Bible to explain Trinity, Atonement, etc., when you know we believe it has been corrupted. Wouldn't it be better for you to try to show us where the trinity and atonement exist in the Qur'an? Especially because you know we believe there are some true words of God still contained in the Bible and Torah. If you could do that....well, then you would have accomplished something really amazing.”

“When you quote from the Bible and say, "This is true because it's in the Bible" What is wrong with someone finding another verse that contradicts and then ask, "If that is true, how can this also be true?"”
This is an excellent definition of open-minded dialogue;D ! There is nothing wrong with this at all. This is an objective and healthy approach to dialogue. It is the right approach to dialogue. The fact that a question is asked about the contradiction is evidence of an open-mind to better understanding. I am very happy to be involved in this form of dialogue. There is a difference, however, in this approach and the approach I have sensed or understood you to be taking. You have been coming across in a way where you seem to choose verses that suite your understanding to contradict verses with which you say are untrue. All this is then, is the use of untruth to prove untruth. If you see a seeming contradiction, point out both verses, lay them on the table and then seek an answer or a valid explanation—if one exists.

“If you are shown clear errors and contradictions, as the Christian, you might want to find out why.”
Again, I do not have a problem whatsoever in dealing with “seeming” contradictions. As much as I might be part of considering the contradiction, you must be part of considering the contradiction to not be a contradiction. You cannot point out what to you is a contradiction and not be open minded enough to see that you may be wrong. I cannot be close-minded enough not to see that I may be wrong.

“In the same way, I can ask you why you are using the Bible to explain Trinity, Atonement, etc., when you know we believe it has been corrupted.”
I know you believe the Bible has been corrupted. But who decides what parts of the Bible have been corrupted? If you use a verse to point out a contradiction, which of those two verses are you going to say is corrupt? If the Bible is corrupt, then all of it is corrupt and you cannot use verses to point out contradiction. A verse that is a contradiction may actually be the corrupted verse and then there will be no contradiction.

Again, I do not have a problem with open-minded dialogue and discussion. Allow me to repeat your excellent definition of dialogue: “When you quote from the Bible and say, "This is true because it's in the Bible" What is wrong with someone finding another verse that contradicts and then ask, "If that is true, how can this also be true?"

Sincerely and with hope for open-minded dialogue:) .
 
Hey PrIM3, i didn't fully understand the expression from the book, could you please explain it? Thanks


sorry.. I have to go to school... but please note that I will get to you as sooon as I get off from school.

have a nice day..

Ps Hana.. I am doing well myself thanks for asking.
 
POBook.. sorry for bothering you.. if I am being a pain on the forum please tell me to leave or something.
 
Greetings once again Hana_Aku,


Here you have changed a text of Scripture in support of your view. You also chose to use some commentary in support of changing the meaning of the text.


Here you have kept a text of Scripture the same in support of your view. If we can change the first text of scripture, then can we not change the second text? Who's to say which one is right and which one is wrong? Why not simply change the second text to mean something different and leave the first one the same? Or, why not simply change them both? Or, why not keep them for what they are and look at context to gain a better understanding of the texts?

You accused me of changing text? Show me where I intentionally misquoted one of the authors. Listen, you don't like the truth, that's painfully obvious. It's ok for you to pick a verse and use your words to explain it, but if a Muslim does that, they are changing text? I have never changed ONE verse, but you do not understand the verses as they are presented and choose to twist their meaning to how they best suit you.



Don't ever accuse me of altering verses I quote from the bible. I don't have to resort to such pathethic tactics. The bible proves itself man-made, it doesn't need me to do that.

I know you believe the Bible has been corrupted. But who decides what parts of the Bible have been corrupted? If you use a verse to point out a contradiction, which of those two verses are you going to say is corrupt? If the Bible is corrupt, then all of it is corrupt and you cannot use verses to point out contradiction. A verse that is a contradiction may actually be the corrupted verse and then there will be no contradiction.

It is exactly that train of thought that allowed the bible to be corrupted and continues to be corrupted today. How can you make such a ridiculous statement like that?? You have the audacity to say it's ok the word of God is corrupted!!! Does it really matter which verse is corrupt???? ONE CORRUPTED VERSE INVALIDATES THE BIBLE!!!

And yes, now I am getting aggravated. I don't appreciate being falsely accused because YOU can't handle the truth. You resorting to such lows in an attempt to evade the topic is all the proof I need to see you cannot respond to what I asked days ago. And, now you admit the bible also contains corrupted verses and you expect us to still accept it is the word of God???!!!!

As Prophet Muhammed, pbuh, taught when dealing with those so blind they only argue for the sake of argument, "To you be your religion, to me be mine."

You can go practice your missionary style tactics on someone else. They won't work with me. When you can learn to handle truth without accusations you may try again to correspond, until then, our conversation is over.

Peace,
Hana
 
Last edited:
Greetings again Tahir,

I appreciate all your questions and willingness to dialogue.

“Now if you add them up you will get 1 day and 2 nights which does not equal 3 days and 3 nights and Jesus (pbuh) was not discovered on the third day. However somehow assuming that the above verses are true this still does not mean Jesus (pbuh) was dead, when Jonah (pbuh) spent 3 days and 3 nights in the whale's body he was still alive and therefore for the above verses to be true Jesus (pbuh) must have still been alive.”
I think it is important to understand that when Jesus was talking about Jonah, He was not focusing on the time frame of Jonah’s circumstance as much as He was focusing on the principle of what happened. If a whale swallowed you into it’s stomach, what are the chances of you getting out alive? It would have to be some amazing miracle, wouldn’t it? When someone is buried in a tomb, what are the chances of that person actually coming out alive? Yet, like the miracle of Jonah, Jesus came out of His burial alive. I think it is also important to read other passages of Scripture that refer to the burial of Jesus. While a couple of verses mention 3 days (Mark 9:31; 10:34) several also talk about the resurrection being “on the third day” (Matthew 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Luke 18:33; 24:46). What’s important to realize here is that Jesus was buried on the Friday and rose from the dead on the Sunday. If you want to read this in more detail, check out http://www.hevanet.com/jamoran/ChristianArticles/Articles/McCord/Three%20Full%20Days%20and%20Three%20Full%20Nights.htm

“Also may i ask why did Mary Magdalene go to visit Jesus' (pbuh) tomb? According to the Gospel writers she went "TO ANOINT HIM", Mark 16:1 The Hebrew word for anoint is "masaha" which basically means to rub, ro massage to anoint. Now why would a woman want to go and massage a dead body? After 3 hours of a person being dead rigor mortis sets in and the body starts to decompose so if someone tried massaging a dead body after 3 days it would fall to pieces! It would however make sense if she was looking for a live person, you see she was about the the only person besides Joseph of Arimathe'a and Nicodemus who had given the final rites to the body of Jesus. If she had seen any sign of life in the limp body of Jesus when he was taken down from the cross, she was not going to shout, "HE IS ALIVE!" She returns after 2 nights and a day, when the Jewish Sabbath had passed, to take care of Jesus.”
If you do not mind me saying so, I am very impressed with your research and attention to detail. That is great!! I would like to address a couple of things you’ve raised here. I found it very interesting that you used the Hebrew word for “anoint.” Why did you use the Hebrew word? It means basically the same thing as the Greek word used in the New Testament “for anoint”—Aleipho—to rub, smear, daub, message in, cover over. Concerning this issue of massaging: We know that live people can be massaged for relief or comfort. Many people use oils to message the body. In the context of Mark 16:1, it is important to understand that in the time of Jesus, every dead person was massaged with oil and fragrances. This served the dual purpose of fulfilling religious obligations at the time as well as preparing the body for burial. In this situation, Jesus died on the preparation day of the Sabbath—sometime in the late afternoon. The priority was to get the dead placed in a tomb. People could do nothing on the Sabbath and that’s why they came as early as they could on the morning after the Sabbath to “anoint” this body. Now, concerning rigor mortis, I did some research and found the following information. Please take a few moments to read it:
Chemistry of Muscle Fibers
A few hours after a person or animal dies, the joints of the body stiffen and become locked in place. This stiffening is called rigor mortis. Depending on temperature and other conditions, rigor mortis lasts approximately 72 hours. The phenomenon is caused by the skeletal muscles partially contracting. The muscles are unable to relax, so the joints become fixed in place.

However, muscles need ATP in order to release from a contracted state (it is used to pump the calcium out of the cells so the fibers can unlatch from each other). ATP reserves are quickly exhausted from the muscle contraction and other cellular processes. This means that the actin and myosin fibers will remain linked until the muscles themselves start to decompose.

Yes, rigor mortis does set in fairly quickly. But the decomposition of the body only begins when the rigor mortis begins coming to an end. This helps explain why these ladies took these anointing oils as early as they could on the third day. In their minds, the body of Jesus was getting ready to start rotting and stink and before that happened, they wanted to “anoint” this body and stop the smell of death. Does this make any sense to you?

“About the stone which covered the tomb, now if Jesus really was a spirit then surely he could walk straight out of the tomb without having to move the stone and if it was to make people believe that he has truly risen from the dead then would it not be better if the stone was not moved? If he walked through the stone it would prove that he risen from the dead as no live human being can walk through physical barriers. Also if people saw Jesus then they could easily go and check the tomb as it was not too heavy to move as one man himself could move it "HE (Joseph of Arimathea) rolled a stone against the door of the tomb" (Mark 15:46).”
Once again, I’m very impressed with your attention to detail! Yes, I agree with you. If Jesus was a spirit, He would have been able to exit that tomb any way He desired. There would have been no way to lock Him in there. If the stone was not moved, and Jesus came back to life, then he would have simply been a spirit and not who He was when he died—a human being. Jesus came back to life in the same way He lost His life and then made people see he was back as a human being. Luke 24:39 says, “Look at My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself! Touch Me and see, because a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you can see I have." In order for Jesus to come out that tomb as the same human being He entered the tomb, the stone needed to be moved. I hope this makes it clear. If you have more questions, please let me know.

“"When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything?" And they said, "Nothing." Then said he unto them, "But now, he that hath no purse, let him take it, and likewise his bag; and he that hath no SWORD, let him sell his garment and buy one!"
(Luke 22:35-36)

". . . Lord, behold, here are two SWORDS." And he said unto them, "It is enough".
(Luke 22:38)

These sound like a physical sword to me and it seems that Jesus wanted to defend himself but if he knew what was going to come and was going to sacrifice himself then why the need for defence?”
I will answer this question. For now, tell me what you think these next few verses in Luke mean, “When those around Him saw what was going to happen, they asked, "Lord, should we strike with the sword?" Then one of them struck the high priest's slave and cut off his right ear. But Jesus responded, "No more of this!" And touching his ear, He healed him. Then Jesus said to the chief priests, temple police, and the elders who had come for Him, "Have you come out with swords and clubs as if I were a criminal?” (Luke 22:49-52)

““Why did Jesus go there to pray? Surely if he is God then why the need to pray to himself?”
The question deals with the Trinity of Jesus. All I want to say right now is that Jesus was the “Son of GOD”; He was also GOD in the flesh. Like you may be both a son and a brother, Jesus was both GOD and man. We can certainly discuss this more if you like.

"And he went a little further, and fell on his face and prayed, saying, 'O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt'." (Matthew 26:37-39)

"And being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat was, as it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground."
(Luke 22:44)

If Jesus knew his job was to sacrifice himself for the peoples sins then why all this worrying? Plus as he is 'God' he shouldn't be worried about what other people are going to do him.”
I don’t think Jesus was worrying. I think He was in full control of Himself. I think He was very sad. He was about to go through remendous pain and suffering. As a human being, He did not want to do this. As GOD in the Flesh, He was willing to do it.

“If Jesus is really 'God' then how he have ancestors? "The generations of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." (Matthew, 1:1) "Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne." (Acts, 2:30)”

Jesus had ancestors in that He was born of a woman. He did not simply come to this earth as some spirit. He was born as a person into this world and therefore He naturally adopted a human lineage.

"And in the morning, rising up a great while before day, he went out, and departed into a solitary place, and there prayed." (Mark, 1:35) Who is Jesus praying to if he is 'God'?
Jesus was praying to His Father in Heaven. Again, this is a Trinity issue.

"Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, THE SON OF JOSEPH," (John, 1:45) Does this mean that Jesus had two fathers?
No. GOD was the Heavenly Father of Jesus. Joseph was the earthly Father of Jesus, but Joseph was not the fleshly Father of Jesus in the sense that you have a father and a mother.

"I can of mine own self do nothing." (John, 5:30) If Jesus is 'God' then surely he should be able to do anything, right?
Yes, Jesus could do anything. The best way I know how to illustrate this is how each of us have the “I and me”. Have you ever known yourself to have to make a hard decision and you find yourself debating this decision with yourself. Part of you says to do this and yet another part of you says to do that. In a way, you are two people but one. Do you understand this?

"But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew, 15:24) Does this mean that the only meant to follow Jesus was meant to be the people of Israel and not the world?
No, not at all. Jesus probably knew this woman would have faith and He was trying to point out the importance of faith in Him to the Jews and to His disciples. He was trying to help His own people understand that even the worst people in the eyes of the world are accepted and loved by Him.
"And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, STRENGTHENING him." (Luke, 22:43) Isn't God all powerful? Then why does he need an angel strengthening him?”
Yes, GOD is all-powerful. But He came to this earth in the form of a man. He had a body like a man; He was tempted and tested like us; He ate, drank, and went to the toilet like us; He worked and learned. But Jesus was a little more than a man; He performed miracles; He knew things people didn’t know; He amazed people with His teaching; He loved and cared for everyone. He experienced joy and He experienced times of sadness, pain, and suffering—the worst of which was just prior to and the implementation of His crucifixion. As a man, He needed strengthening through a very difficult time in His life.

I really hope I have helped answer your questions. If not, please let me know. If you have more questions, feel free to ask.

Sincerely,
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top