Did Jesus (p) Deny Being God?

Al-Mu'min I must say that the more I read from the site you cited, that site is awfull.

Thanks
Nimrod

Bro Nim,
If you give me one thing in that site that is wrong or made up. I promise to stop qouting from it.:okay:

Concerning the creature you mentioned that was 4 in one or 5 in one.. I will open a new thread concerning the trinity. Thats what it comes down to right?

Peace out.
 
but i don't understand why bro nimrod is just getting ''qoutes'' out and just posting them cause they do not make sense at all :(

take care
 
Sister Islamgyal is right.
Starting from myself, I aplogise if i have hurt anyone's feelings exept Heigou( juz kiddin'). I posted an article a page back in this thread. The verses where right but the comments made by the author of the article were diserspectful. I should've edited before posting but I didn't have enough time. So sorry once again.

Peace out.
 
bro it doesn't matter cause it happens don't worry about it :)

anyway all i can say that i wish all the best for bro heigou and i will pray for him for the year after cause when we gave evidence to people they still don't believe us :offended:

and having all that time searching is just a waste of time so i suggess people should go and do some research for them self's :rollseyes

also i understand it is very hard for ''christans'' to believe that izlam is the truth religion but then again it was hard for me when i have converted so i'll say this again i will pray for the christans and may god bring them to the right path too like he did to me :) (amin)


wish you all good look with your research :)

take care
 
What's up? How are your plans on creating your own religion going?

That's not nice. Deliberately stating an untruth of such a hurtful nature to win an argument is shameful in my opinion. What do you think?

HeiGou said:
Actually the problem is I understand all too well. I was never taught to be a Christian and even I can tell your quotes are bogus.

Man you don't get it do you? Which of the verses I stated above are bogus?

It is not the verses that are bogus it is the interpretation. I did not say verses, I said quotes. Try and find anywhere in the Bible where Moses says anything positive about raping three year olds or sticking fingers up places God did not intend as your Brother claims. As you seem to endorse by the way. These are bogus.

It would be silly to follow a book if you didn't think it was from God. No we can't. God is not peaceful, He is merciful but war is one of his inventions and He seems to allow a lot of it to go on. He is not tolerant - look what He does to people who worship idols.

No it will be silly to claim to follow a book when you really don't. You agreed with me earlier that some( if not all of them) verses are just attributed to God. For the sake of all let's just say that the good verses( do not lie etc.) are from God while the violent ones are man made.

Actually I don't think that is what I agreed. I think it is more likely that I agreed some of your quotes were accurate Biblical verses. I do not know which are made up if any. Nor I suspect do you. The Earth is a violent place. It is full of earthquakes and tsunamis that kill people. If God exists it is all part of His plan. Draw your own conclusion.

Actually very little you stated above came from the Bible. I can reasonably assume you have never read it. It came from www.a-c.com which is a hate-filled lie-infested vile site run by a silly silly young man. So they have been tampered with - by your Palestinian brother.

Show me ONE verse that I qouted wrongly.

I can show you many verses, and have, that you interpreted wrongly. Like to make any of the claims you made about three year old girls again? You have asserted the Bible contains things it does not. Care to defend those claims?

Thanks for the link though.

Relax. First of all, no one is going to ban you. This forum is going to be too boring without someone like you who rejects every proven fact.

Show me said proven fact.

Secondly the site that this brother started is an answer to the site called Answering-Islam. As some of you may now, this site is run by a group of lunatics who have a talent of making stuff up. I invite you Mr. Confucius (A.K.A brother HeiGou ) to take a look at this site. Find a single article that is true and we will talk about it.

I am in no position to judge and pasting that here would get me banned. Why don't you tell me which things you think are made up and we'll discuss it. After all I think their differences are mostly differences of interpretation, not of fact.

The Palestian brother only corrects everything said about Allah, Prophet Mohammed, and the Quran with well know rebuttals. How is that a hate site?
How is any of his claims about three year old girls well-known? And of course if he circulates lies they become well known but they do not become true.

Well some Christians say that. I doubt all do. The more important issue is that Muhammed comes after Christ and Christ is the last and final message from God. Therefore to a Christian, Muhammed cannot be a prophet. Muslims are to Christians what Bahais are to Muslims - a later, and hence false, religion.

Christ said he came to fullfill way clearly than abrogate:
http://www.answers2prayer.org/bible...n one anonymous poll on a website favors you.
 
Last edited:
Islam Gyal “but I don't understand why bro nimrod is just getting ''quotes'' out and just posting them cause they do not make sense at all”, please forgive my ignorance but I am not understanding your post or it’s meaning. Can you explain it to me please?

Al-Mu’min I am still working on the reply to the cites, and yes there is much wrong information there. Thanks for agreeing to stop using the site as a source for quotes.

Thanks
Nimrod
 
well bro i just hate it when we gave people evidence and they just don't believe us!

we can't do anything better than that!

take care
 
Bismillah

This thread is hot. I will like to first like to make a point on the name "Immanuel".

"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel (God is with us)."

Isaiah 7:14


Muslims are commanded in the Qur'an to believe in Jesus (pbuh) as a true and faithful prophet of God. For this reason, Muslims have no trouble believing that prophets of the Old Testament prophesied the coming of Jesus (pbuh). However, as we have already seen in chapter two, over the ages mankind continued to feel the need to embroider and improve upon the word of God. This was not restricted to merely inserting, deleting, or changing words as seen in previous chapters, rather, they even went so far as to try to "prove" their innovations through the citation of other ancient passages. There are many examples of this. One such example shall be studied here.


When members of the clergy read to their flock the verse of Isaiah 7:14, they then go on to explain to them: "Do you see? Prophet Isaiah prophesied the coming of the God Himself. Immanuel means 'God is with us,' so this is not only a prophesy of the coming of God but also a prophesy of the 'incarnation' of God Almighty in the form of Jesus".


It is true, Immanuel does mean "God is with us." However, this is a prime example of how the evangelists manage to constantly base their arguments on catch words or phrases and then quickly gloss over the details.


The phrase "a virgin" which we find in our English Bibles does not appear in the original Hebrew text. The word used is 'almah {al-maw'} meaning "a young woman of marriageable age". The Hebrew word for "virgin" is bthuwlah (beth-oo-law'). When the Hebrew text is translated into Greek in the NT, it uses the word parthenos {per-then'-os}, which has a dual meaning; a young girl or a virgin. The translators have mistakenly chosen the latter. More recent and accurate versions of the Bible such as the Revised Standard Version present this verse as follows:


"Therefore, the Lord Himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel"

Isaiah 7:14 (RSV)


Biblical scholars have suggested that this prophesy was concerning the second son or possibly the third son of Isaiah by a Jewish maiden. It does not relate to Jesus or his virgin birth.


If Jesus (pbuh) was indeed intended by this prophesy, then why was he named "Jesus" and not "Immanuel" as the prophesy requires? Notice that the prophesy states that "his NAME shall be Immanuel." It does not say that "HE shall be Immanuel." There is a big difference between saying "His name shall be 'God is with us'" and between saying "He shall be God with us."


"Immanuel" is not the only name in the OT that contains the word "El" (God). There are hundreds of Hebrew names that consist of "El" and another noun. For example, "Ishmael" which means "God hears." Did God's sense of hearing come down to earth and live among us in the form of a man? Was God's sense of hearing "incarnated" in the form of a man?. There is also "Israel" (prince of God), and "Elijah" (my God is Jehovah), and so forth. As we can see, it was a very common occurrence for Israelites to have such names. Neither prophet Isaiah, nor King Ahaz, nor any Jew ever thought that the prophesy was for God himself to come down and live among them.


In Genesis 28:19 we read "And he called the name of that place Bethel (house of God)". Since the place was named "house of God," does this mean that God lived inside this house?


In Genesis 32:30, we are told that Jacob (pbuh) called a piece of land "Peni-el" (Face of God). The actual text states: "And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel," is this the same as saying: "And Jacob said this place is Peniel"? Was the patch of land the actual face of God? Was the face of God "incarnated" in this piece of land?


Gabriel, the name of the angle of God, has been interpreted in Biblical references as having the general meaning of "Strength of God." So, does this mean that the angle Gabriel is the "incarnation" of the "strength of God"?


"The name Immanuel could mean 'God be with us' in the sense 'God help us!'"

Interpreter's dictionary of the Bible, V2, p. 686.


Jesus (pbuh) was given his name by the angel Gabriel even before his birth (Matthew 1:21). Never was he named "Immanuel." King Ahaz was in danger. His enemies were closing in. This is when a promise was made to show him a sign, a pregnant woman, not a virgin Mary (pbuh) who would not show up until many centuries after he had turned to dust. Can we see how the Trinitarian doctrine of incarnation was forced upon the message of Jesus (pbuh) through "bending" of the prophesies and general glossing over of the "trivial details"? For more on how the "incarnation" was forced upon the message of Jesus centuries after his departure, please read section 1.2.5.
 
bro there we go alot of info and good info

that's what we call a good bro :)

may god bless you in the year after (amin)

take care
 
The noble Qur'an, Al-Israa(17):42-44.


"And say: Praise be to Allah, Who has not taken unto Himself a son, and Who has no partner in the Sovereignty, nor has He any ally through dependence. And magnify Him with all magnificence."


Now as for the trinity.

"For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I [am] the LORD; and [there is] none else." Isaiah 45:18.


It is described as "a mystery." As we just read, the first definition of the Trinity was put forth in the fourth century as follows: "...we worship one God in the trinity, and Trinity in Unity...for there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Ghost is all one... they are not three gods, but one God... the whole three persons are co-eternal and co-equal...he therefore that will be saved must thus think of the trinity..." (excerpts from the Athanasian creed).

All Bibles in existence today tell us that Christians are taught by Jesus (pbuh) himself:

"And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment."

Mark 12:29-30.

They (Christians) are also told

"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good"

1 Thessalonians 5:21


and "For God is not [the author] of confusion"

1 Corinthians 14:33.


We read in Numbers, that Allaah is not a man nor a son of man.
In the Bible we read "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?", Numbers 23:19


However, Allaah ta'ala has warned us in Al-Qur'an

"And verily, among them is a party who twist their tongues with the Scripture that you might think that it is from the Scripture but it is not from the Scripture; and they say, 'It is from Allah' but it is not from Allah; and they speak a lie against Allah while [well] they know it!"

The noble Qur'an, A'al-Umran(3):78


Allaah willing I will respond later.

Wa Allaahu Alim
 
now bro higou i suggess you read that cause thats what you need :)

take care
 
OK if someone is going to praise this I will make the effort to point out how bad the information is.

"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel (God is with us)."

Isaiah 7:14

Muslims are commanded in the Qur'an to believe in Jesus (pbuh) as a true and faithful prophet of God. For this reason, Muslims have no trouble believing that prophets of the Old Testament prophesied the coming of Jesus (pbuh).

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the Quran also say that Mary was a virgin? If so aren't Muslims required to believe that she was a virgin? Do you doubt it? If not, what are you doing?

However, as we have already seen in chapter two, over the ages mankind continued to feel the need to embroider and improve upon the word of God.

I hate replying to cut and pastes.

The phrase "a virgin" which we find in our English Bibles does not appear in the original Hebrew text. The word used is 'almah {al-maw'} meaning "a young woman of marriageable age". The Hebrew word for "virgin" is bthuwlah (beth-oo-law'). When the Hebrew text is translated into Greek in the NT, it uses the word parthenos {per-then'-os}, which has a dual meaning; a young girl or a virgin. The translators have mistakenly chosen the latter.

Self evidently as the Jews did not allow premarital sex, a girl of marriageable age who was not married was, by definition, a virgin. I do not see that the translators chose the wrong word. As Mary was not married when Jesus was born are you asserting that she was sleeping around? Are you asserting that her virtue was in any way shape or form impaired?

More recent and accurate versions of the Bible such as the Revised Standard Version present this verse as follows:

Or, strickly speaking, more modern and anti-Catholic versions of the Bible say.....

In Genesis 28:19 we read "And he called the name of that place Bethel (house of God)". Since the place was named "house of God," does this mean that God lived inside this house?

Self-evidently there is a difference between The House of God and God is With Us. In one God is the active party, in the other He is not. The house is merely dedicated to him. Same with God Hears. Not God's hearing.
 
Bismillah

I disgree. The Qur'an does, indeed say that Mary is a virgin and Muslims believe it. And firstly, do not imply that I am saying anything I am not. I am telling you that the Isaiah 7:14 is not a prophecy of Jesus(p).

The church must hold this position because Matthew 1:22-23 translates alma in Isaiah 7:14 as “virgin.” The first Gospel quotes this well-known verse to provide the only “Old Testament” proof text for the supposed virgin birth of Jesus.

The point is that the angel told them his name shall be Jesus (In the KJV).
Back to the Hebrew "Alma."

If the Hebrew word alma means virgin, then each usage in the Bible must be either a clear reference to a virgin or at least be ambiguous. The word alma appears in the Jewish scriptures seven times.

If even one reference clearly refers to a woman who is not a virgin, then Matthew’s rendition of Isaiah 7:14 becomes untenable. Sorry to say.

One of the places where the uncommon Hebrew word alma appears in the Bible is in Proverbs 30:18-20 which reads,

There are three things which are too wonderful for me, four which I do not understand: the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a serpent on a rock, the way of a ship in the middle of the sea, and the way of a man with a young woman [b’alma]. This is the way of an adulterous woman: she eats and wipes her mouth, and says, “I have done no wrong.”

Now, Heigou, what is that verse saying? In the above three verses, King Solomon compares a man with an alma to three other things: an eagle in the sky, a serpent on a rock, and a ship in the sea. What do these three things all have in common? They leave no trace. After the eagle has flown across the sky, determining that the eagle had ever flown there is impossible. Once a snake has slithered over a rock, there is no way to discern that the snake had ever crossed there (as opposed to a snake slithering over sand or grass, where it leaves a trail). After a ship has moved across the sea, the water comes together behind it and there is no way to tell that a ship had ever passed through there. Similarly, King Solomon informs us that once a man has been with an alma there is also no trace of the fornication that had occurred between them. Therefore, in the following verse (verse 20) King Solomon explains that once this adulterous woman has eaten (a metaphor for her fornication), she removes the trace of her sexual activity by exclaiming, “I have done no wrong.”

The word alma clearly does not mean virgin.


The point that there are "anti-Catholic" Bibles has nothig to do with the wording of the verse. It clearly has two meanings, however, the Jewish Bible uses the correct one.

In Genesis 28:19 we read "And he called the name of that place Bethel (house of God)". Since the place was named "house of God," does this mean that God lived inside this house?


Self-evidently there is a difference between The House of God and God is With Us. In one God is the active party, in the other He is not. The house is merely dedicated to him. Same with God Hears. Not God's hearing.

There is a difference, however, the point is because the name Immanuel means, "God with us." Does it automatically refer to Jesus(p)?
 
Last edited:
Bismillah ir Rahman ir Raheem
Audthu billah minash shaytanir rajeem

Moreover, in the same way that in the English language the words “young woman” have no bearing on whether virginity is present or not, in the Hebrew language there is no relationship between the words alma and virgin. Actually, it is usually a young woman who bears children.

Had Isaiah wished to speak about a virgin birth, he would have used the word "bthuwlah" not alma. bthuwlah is a common word in the Jewish scriptures, and can only mean “virgin.” Which in fact Isaiah does indeed use the term bthuwlah in other verses on the Jewish Bible.

And Allaah (swt) knows best.
 
Last edited:
Bismillah ir Rahman ir Raheem
Audthu billah minash shaytanir rajeem

Moreover, in the same way that in the English language the words “young woman” have no bearing on whether virginity is present or not, in the Hebrew language there is no relationship between the words alma and virgin. Actually, it is usually a young woman who bears children.

Had Isaiah wished to speak about a virgin birth, he would have used the word "bthuwlah" not alma. bthuwlah is a common word in the Jewish scriptures, and can only mean “virgin.” Which in fact Isaiah does indeed use the term bthuwlah in other verses on the Jewish Bible.

And Allaah (swt) knows best.


that is true bro cause right infront of me i have got the bible with me :happy:

take care
 
Bismillah

Allaah (awj) has warned us about this. It happened then and it is happening now.

Sister, they (Christians) wonder why we do not accept the Bible, because of misinformation. Either intentional or unintentional, Allaah knows best. However, Allaah says in Qur'an Surah Baqarah ayaat 111 And they say: "None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian." Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful."

And Allaah (swt) warns us in Surah Baqarah ayaat 42 "And cover not Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when ye know (what it is)."


Wasalaam

Wa Allaahu Alim.
 
bro i do understand you but then again i have converted and ''some'' christains do not believe that the bible has changed!

also most christians believe that Jesus is god!

how can that be right?! ok when i ''was'' a christian i did believe that Jesus was son of god but not god that's not right at all!

and i swear if i had a priest with me believe me he will say ''no'' the bible is not changed! but then again it deppends which priest it is! :p

anway my point is that ''christians'' can not take it that izlam it the truth religion sorry to say this tho that i know that it is hard for ''christians'' to believe that, but then again my self and bro ahmed and br al mu'min has gave you alot of evidence when they wanted it but they don't appreciate it so i suggess they go and do some research them self's!

there is one god that we must all fear!


take care
 
Moreover, in the same way that in the English language the words “young woman” have no bearing on whether virginity is present or not, in the Hebrew language there is no relationship between the words alma and virgin. Actually, it is usually a young woman who bears children.

Actually it does. Hebrew was spoken in a highly repressive religious environment. Of course being young and unmarried meant that a girl was a virgin. The two go together.

Had Isaiah wished to speak about a virgin birth, he would have used the word "bthuwlah" not alma. bthuwlah is a common word in the Jewish scriptures, and can only mean “virgin.” Which in fact Isaiah does indeed use the term bthuwlah in other verses on the Jewish Bible.

This is the problem of cutting and pasting from atheist sites, I simply doubt your interpretation:

`Almah occurs seven times in the Hebrew Bible and usually seems to mean a young woman of marriageable age (e.g. Genesis 24:43), but is never used in the Old Testament of anyone who was not a virgin; bethulah is accepted in modern Hebrew usage as the characteristic Hebrew word for virgin. However, it is qualified by a statement ‘neither had any man known her’ in Gen. 24:16, and is used of a widow in Joel 1:8. In the Ugaritic tablets, btlt was used of the goddess Anath who was a consort of Baal; and in other records, the Aramaic counterpart of betûlah is used of a married woman.​

So you have got it backwards. Almah means virgin. Bethulah does not.
 
also most christians believe that Jesus is god!

Actually it is kind of tough to be a Christian and not think that Jesus was God. Perhaps a Unitarian.

how can that be right?! ok when i ''was'' a christian i did believe that Jesus was son of god but not god that's not right at all!

I see your problem. You converted from a religion you knew little about. Christians claim that Jesus is God but also the Son of God. Confusing I know.

anway my point is that ''christians'' can not take it that izlam it the truth religion sorry to say this tho that i know that it is hard for ''christians'' to believe that,

Why would it be hard for Christians to believe that Islam is not the truth?
 
well bro heigou i knew alot about ''christian'' and no he was not god! he was son of god!

but then again people believe in different way it depends what your parents believe

you just don't understand at all! izlam is the best religion!

please go and do some research on it :)

take care
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top