Bible:- Canon of the Bible..

'Could not understand' and 'did not understand' gives two different connotations. What I meant by 'could not understand' is more an expression of bewilderment than anything else at the stupidity of such a belief.

you don't... but other does...

[ Last edited by me on 3-12-2004 at 03:08 PM ]

Originally posted by me at 2004-12-3 03:06 PM:

you don't... but other does...

[ Last edited by me on 3-12-2004 at 03:08 PM ]

To each his own. I'm not forcing you to believe what I believe ~ but I will never believe what you believe.

i believe the world is round...

Originally posted by me at 2004-12-3 03:25 PM:
i believe the world is round...

:hmm: Than you don't believe in the bible  ~ because its says the world is flat.


Daniel 4:10-11. In Daniel, the king 搒aw a tree of great height at the centre of the earth...reaching with its top to the sky and visible to the earth's farthest bounds.

but I will never believe what you believe.

if i believe the world is round...then you don't believe it....


Daniel 4:10-11. In Daniel, the king 搒aw a tree of great height at the centre of the earth...reaching with its top to the sky and visible to the earth's farthest bounds.

Originally posted by me at 2004-12-3 03:48 PM:


if i believe the world is round...then you don't believe it....


Daniel 4:10-11. In Daniel, the king 搒aw a tree of great height at the centre of the earth...reaching with its top to the ...

Heheh...no wonder...i saw you looking out your window... trying to see a coconut tree in Africa. :lol

wow...bet you can see where i am now...don't you...

you said it yourself u can never accept or understand the bible...like you can understand that...

Originally posted by me at 2004-12-3 04:06 PM:
wow...bet you can see where i am now...don't you...

you said it yourself u can never accept or understand the bible...like you can understand that...

People joking laa..:lol Trying to relate  it to what the bible says (you better read what I pasted first ~ I don't think you even know that those words exist in the bible)  ~ which implies that the bible writers didn't know that the world is round. Neither do the readers know what they are reading.

[ Last edited by KENNKID on 3-12-2004 at 04:29 PM ]

13Friday

True Muslims themselves, no doubt.  Don't blame Christians.

Read this extract from Islam Jihadunspun in URL http://www.jihadunspun.com/artic ... /ashes2light11.html

The Muslim Ummah is weak because we as Muslims are weak. In America and the West, the enemies of Islam have cleverly segmented country and religion. Muslims in the West are now faced with choosing one over the other. In this there is no decision. Some have opted to serve two masters; a choice that fails to serve either. The enemies of Islam are cunning indeed. They have further fragmented Muslims into categories, from moderates to extremists. There is no such thing in Islam. There is neither compulsion nor compromise in the requirements laid out for us in the Qur'an or the Sunnah.

>>

So is there such as moderate or fundamental or radical Muslims.

ONE Islam under one prophet Mohd.

ONE Allah as divided as that.

Muslims after 911 say radical or extreme Muslims hijacked Islam, the religion of PEACE.

Muslims are not violent but they jihad for a good cause of ALLAH.  Yes Allah asks them to kill the unbelievers.

Who are confused?  Muslims themselves.

I thank the true God in Christ that sadly He had permitted 911 attacks on WTC when almost 50,000 work there daily, but only less than 3,000 perished as saints so that others may learn from that tragic lesson.  

It is post 911 that many are exposed to the FULL  to the type of Islam I already know.
Islam had progressed silently and ONCE exposed the house of confused people of Jihad is surely to fall as the wrath of the true God.  Would Muslims learn from the efforts of the living Saints in Christ?

Praise that God would lead many more like confused Dixon back to the TRUTH of God.
See that story in http://forum.cari.com.my/viewthr ... ge=1&sid=io0t5N



------Who make unjust laws?  (Isaiah 10:1)

Originally posted by KENNKID at 3-12-2004 04:23 PM:


People joking laa..:lol Trying to relate  it to what the bible says (you better read what I pasted first ~ I don't think you even know that those words exi ...

well that's what you said...

aenemy7

9-11 Tragedy still shrowded with unanswered questions....go here;

http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html


Allah Knows Best...
Peace Yall...

aenemy7

Taken from; http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch2.2.html

2.2 A small sampling of these contradictions p1

"And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none. For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands. But neither so did their witness agree together."

Mark 14:56-59

Christian scholars have known, recognized, and documented the many and varied contradictions to be found in the Bible for centuries now. These contradictions are a direct result of the continuous and unrelenting attempts to correct, fix, and amend the Bible in order to make a given doctrine "clear" to the reader. It is the masses who have been kept in the dark in this regard. There is extensive historical and scriptural evidence to be found in the books of the Bible which support this conclusion. Many detailed examples have been presented in this and other chapters of this book. As shown above, some Christian scholars estimate the errors in the Bible to be in the range of 48,800. This is why it has become necessary for the Church to demand "blind faith" from the masses.


Matthew is now recognized as not being the author of Matthew (read for example Matthew 9:9). John is also recognized as not being the author of John (read for example John 21:24).... and on and on. These Christian scholars (not Muslims) have even gone so far as to attempt to identify the original documents from which these books were originally derived, such as J, P, Y, Q,...etc.(see section 2.3) . For centuries now, the Qur'an has been bearing witness that the previous books of God had been modified by the hands of the unscrupulous few. Even now when Christians and their universities themselves recognize this to be a historical fact they still do not bother to tell the masses. Some of these Conservative scholars, such as Mr. F.F. Bruce, appear to have completely given up on refuting the proof of distortion and have now resorted to "spiritualizing" the Bible and telling people in effect that the teachings of the Bible are useful anyway even if we don't even know who the inspired authors are.


Others will adamantly refuse to believe that anyone has changed the word of God or that the Bible contains any conflictions whatsoever no matter how much evidence is presented. They are willing to either:

1) Explain it away using abstraction to explain the "true" meanings of the verses presented, or

2) Explain it based upon assumptions of their own not contained in the Bible, or

3) Claim that these matters are all insignificant and that the words remain the inspiration of God even if we don't know who the "inspired" authors were and their narrations contradict one another.

Even at that, they don't attempt to explain all the contradictions presented. As we have seen in the previous chapter, they have developed a system where in one paragraph they manage to reduce many thousands of discrepancies to "only a handful which are at all important," and even before reaching the end of the paragraph, even this "handful" is quickly brushed away as being "only apparent discrepancies."


The problem in many cases is that it is human nature when given a choice between two matters, to take the simpler of the two, sometimes even against one's better judgment. This is indeed how many people lose their life savings to people who tell them that they will invest it for them in a "sure thing," or people who encourage others to participate in lotteries. We would not expect that our land would grow fruit without our having to lavish upon it months of back breaking work. We would not expect that a large company would be willing to pay us a handsome weekly paycheck without our actually doing some useful work for them, however, when it comes to the ultimate reward and the ultimate prize, the Paradise of the Lord of creation, now we are told that it is no longer necessary to work for the ultimate prize.


Paul has made salvation a very easy commodity to come by in Christianity. They only have to "believe." No actual work is required. No one has to work for their salvation (Romans 3:28, etc.). Paul has brought for them the "sure thing" and the short cut to salvation. The commandments of Jesus (pbuh) which he himself observed faithfully and fully up until the crucifixion, are all discarded by Paul as old, decaying, and ready to vanish away (Hebrews 8:13, etc.). The fact that Jesus (pbuh) himself told his followers that observing the commandments and selling their belongings shall make them "perfect" is forgotten (Matthew 19:16-21). The fact that Jesus (pbuh) himself commanded his followers to keep the commandments until the end of time is also forgotten (Matthew 5:17-19). All they need is "faith." They have already been saved. The commandments are merely "extra."


In this chapter I have presented a table containing only a small sampling of the many and varied contradictions between the verses of the Bible. These are only some of the very simple and obvious examples known today. Other more serious ones require comparisons of many passages with each other (see for example sections 5.2, 5.4 and 5.5) or with historical or scientific knowledge. The reader is encouraged to investigate these examples and to try to analyze the excuses given for them objectively. Please do not accept any and all attempts to justify these contradictions without first analyzing them carefully. When someone tells you that something was a scribal error then remember that the transmitters of even the Old Testament claim that every word and every letter was faithfully counted and recorded and thus, it would be impossible for unintentional errors to creep in. This claim by itself should refute all excuses.


For instance, the contradiction between Matthew 17:13 and John 1:21 (point 16 below) is explained by Mr. J as: "John is answering the question directly and literally, he is not Elijah, he is John the son of Zechariah.... John was not interested in promoting all kind of speculation about his identity, but to focus attention upon the one he had been sent to prepare the way for." So, if Joe is a vice principal, and someone asks the principal "Is Joe the vice principal?" and the Principal says "yes," then it is OK for Joe to say "I am not the vice principal" because he is "talking within the context that he is Joe" and he wants to "focus attention" on the principal?


Does this sound logical? These apologists' arguments are usually presented with such confidence that people don't bother to analyze them or look any further. The Jews acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah hinges on John admitting he is Elias (Mark 9:12). If John does not admit to being Elias then Jesus' (pbuh) whole message will lose credibility. Is this how John "focuses attention" on Jesus?


It is inconceivable to think that John, peace be upon him, a prophet of God, would intentionally lie especially in a matter that can totally nullify Jesus' whole message. It is also inconceivable that a prophet of God would remain a prophet of God for many years before the coming of Jesus (pbuh), fulfilling many prophesies, but neither know that he was sent by God, nor be informed by God that He sent him.


The Qur'an tells us that if the word of God were ever to be tampered with by the hands of mankind then it will be easy to detect this tampering by the contradictions which will inevitably result. We read


"Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah, they would have surely found therein much discrepancy."

The noble Qur'an, Al-Nissa(4):82.


Even the Bible itself gives the same criteria for discovering such modifications,


"For many bare false witness against him(Jesus), but their witness agreed not together."

Mark 14:56

aenemy7

Here are more examples of the contradiction in the bible,u can find more at;

http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch2.2.1.html


Verse: Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king (So Jesus was born about the year 6 B.C.)

Contradicting Verse: Luke 2:1-7And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. ([And] this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)... And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn. (so Jesus was born about the year 7 C.E. FULLY THIRTEEN YEARS LATER)


Verse: Acts 9:26-29 and Acts 26:19-21(Paul is saved)

Contradicting Verse: Galatians 1:15-22(Was he really?)


Verse: Acts 9:7(heard voice, saw no man)

Contradicting Verse: Acts 22:9(no voice, saw light)


Verse: Matt.10:2-4, Mark3:16-19 (Jesus apostles' names, the twelfth is Lebbeus who's surname was Thaddeus)

Contradicting Verse: Luke 6:14-16 (apostles' names now different, the twelfth in Luke is Judas the brother of James)


Verse:  Matthew 27:5 (Judas hangs himself)

Contradicting Verse: Acts 1:18 (Judas falls headlong, his bowels gush)



Verse:  Matthew 11:13-14,17:13 (Elias is John the Baptist)

Contradicting Verse: John 1:21 (Elias is not John the Baptist)


Verse:  Mark 15:25 (crucified by third hour)

Contradicting Verse: John 19:14 (not crucified by sixth hour)


Verse:  Matthew 1:16 (Jesus son of Joseph son of Jacob)

Contradicting Verse: Luke 3:23 (Jesus son of Joseph son of Heli)



There are many more which u can read for urself at the url i gave in this post...Peace Yall!!!

aenemy7

Read more at; http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/musl ... s-say/contents.html


Anglican bishops declare that Jesus is not God


Muslims are not the only ones who believe that Jesus (pbuh) is mortal and not a god. The Jews also believe this, in addition to the very first groups of Christianity such as the Ebonites, the Cerinthians, the Basilidians, the Capocratians, and the Hypisistarians. The Arians, Paulicians and Goths also accepted Jesus (pbuh) as a prophet of God. Even in the modern age there are churches in Asia, in Africa, the Unitarian church, the Jehovah's witnesses, and even the majority of today's Anglican Bishops do not worship Jesus (pbuh) as God.


In the British newspaper the "Daily News" 25/6/84 under the heading "Shock survey of Anglican Bishops" We read


"More than half of England's Anglican Bishops say that Christians are not obliged to believe that Jesus Christ was God, according to a survey published today. The pole of 31 of England's 39 bishops shows that many of them think that Christ's miracles, the virgin birth and the resurrection might not have happened exactly as described in the Bible. Only 11 of the bishops insisted that Christians must regard Christ as both God and man, while 19 said it was sufficient to regard Jesus as 'God's supreme agent'"


But what is a messenger of God? Is he not "God's supreme agent" ?. This is indeed what God Himself has already told us in the noble Qur'an 1400 years ago, and exactly what Jesus (pbuh) himself testified to in the Bible:


"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."

John 17:3


Astounding, isn't it? With every passing day, the most learned among the Christian community are slowly recognizing the truth and drawing closer and closer to Islam. These are not Muslims who issued this statement. These are not "liberal" Christians. These are the most learned and most highly esteemed men of the Anglican Church. These men have dedicated their whole lives to the study of the religion of Jesus, and their study has driven them to the truth which God had already revealed to them in the Qur'an 1400 years ago: That Jesus was not God. That God is not a Trinity. And that the stories of the ministry of Jesus in the Bible have been extensively tampered with by the hands of mankind.


"And when Allah said: O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he said: Be You glorified. It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then You knew it. You know what is in my [innermost] self but I know not what is in Yours. Truly! You, only You are the Knower of things hidden. I spoke unto them only that which You commanded me, (saying): Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness over them while I dwelt among them, and when You took me You were the Watcher over them, and You are Witness over all things."

The noble Qur'an, Al-Maidah(5):116-118


The Church, as Heinz Zahrnt put it "put words into the mouth of Jesus which he never spoke and attributed actions to him which he never performed." One of those who has shown that most of what the church says about Jesus is baseless is Rudolph Augustein in his book "Jesus the Son of Man." Another very comprehensive study of this matter can be found in the book "The Myth of God Incarnate" which was written by seven theologian scholars in England in 1977 and edited by John Hick. Their conclusion in this matter is that Jesus was "a man approved by God, for a special role within the divine purpose, and..... the later conception of him as God incarnate ... is a mythological or poetic way of expressing his significance for us." See also John Mackinnon Robertson's "Christianity and Mythology" T.W Doane's "The Bible Myths and their Parallels in Other Religions" (A good summary of these studies is available in M.F. Ansarei, "Islam and Christianity in the Modern World").


A University of Richmond professor, Dr. Robert Alley, after considerable research into newly found ancient documents concludes that


"....The (Biblical) passages where Jesus talks about the Son of God are later additions.... what the church said about him. Such a claim of deity for himself would not have been consistent with his entire lifestyle as we can reconstruct. For the first three decades after Jesus' death Christianity continued as a sect within Judaism. The first three decades of the existence of the church were within the synagogue. That would have been beyond belief if they (the followers) had boldly proclaimed the deity of Jesus."


Is there any confirmation of this in the Bible, yes! If we were to read the Bible we would find that long after the departure of Jesus, his faithful followers continued to "keep up their daily attendance at the Temple" (Acts 2:46) It would be beyond belief to imagine that had Jesus indeed preached to his apostles that he was God, and if Jesus had indeed commanded them to forsake the commandments, that they would then disregard all of this and continue to worship in a Jewish synagogue on a daily basis, let alone the great Temple itself. It is further beyond belief that the Jews of the Temple would stand idly by and allow them to do this if they were preaching the total cancellation of the law of Moses and that Jesus was God.


Can any Trinitarian Christian, even in their wildest fantasies, imagine that the Jews in an orthodox Jewish synagogue would stand idly by while he took out his cross and prayed to Jesus in the midst of their synagogue and was publicly calling others to worship Jesus and forsake the commandments? How much more preposterous to imagine that they would have nothing to say to someone who did that in their most sacred of all synagogues, the Temple, on a daily basis yet. This is further evidence in support of the Qur'an, that Jesus only called his followers to a continuation of the religion of Moses and not by any means to the total cancellation and destruction of that law.


In the previous section, we read the following verses of the Bible:

"Know therefore this day, and consider [it] in thine heart, that the LORD he [is] God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: [there is] none else." Deuteronomy 4:39.
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Exodus 20:3
"For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name [is] Jealous, [is] a jealous God:" Exodus 34:14
"Ye [are] my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I [am] he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, [even] I, [am] the LORD; and beside me [there is] no savior." Isaiah 43:10-11.
"Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I [am] the first, and I [am] the last; and beside me [there is] no God." Isaiah 44:6
"That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that [there is] none beside me. I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else." Isaiah 45:6
"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.
"Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else." Isaiah 45:22


Now we should begin to ask ourselves: If there was no god before or after God Almighty, then how was Jesus (pbuh) "begotten" as a god? The answer is: he was not. He was a mortal man, not a god. We even have the testimony of the majority of today's Anglican Bishops in defense of this basic truth. If we want the testimony of a trustworthy witness then how much more trustworthy a witness shall we ever find than the majority of the most learned and respected conservative Christians of the Anglican Church?


The Bible only preaches that Jesus is God and that God is a Trinity to those who do not know it's innermost details and the truth of the history of the Church as these men have come to know it. But let us move on in our study of the Biblical verses so that we can see only a small sampling of the evidence that has made the truth clear to these men.


Allah Knows Best...
Peace Yall....

aenemy7

Read more at;  http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/musl ... s-say/contents.html



The systematic destruction of the law of Jesus


Jesus (pbuh) was a very devout Jew. No Jew could ever raise a finger at him and say why do you not observe the Sabbath? Why do you eat pork? Indeed, it is the apostles of Jesus and not Jesus himself who are depicted in the NT as violating the law. The Bible tells us that Jesus (pbuh) departed never having eaten pork, never having violated the Sabbath, divorce was disallowed except in adultery during his lifetime, he followed the law of Moses to the letter. However, Paul's dreams have now legalized for all Christians that which Jesus (according to the Bible) died believing in.


You will not find a single priest or evangelist who tells his Christian followers "to enter heaven, only keep the commandments" (as his "Lord" did). The vast majority of Christians today do not refrain from eating pork nor do they observe the Sabbath as their "Lord" did, and died doing. There are so many differences between Christians today and Jesus and his actions. Christians in general follow the commandments of Paul and others who are given the power to totally cancel out all of the commandments of both Moses and Jesus, and no Christian has any reservations whatsoever. Christianity is literally built around the premise that disciples of disciples, have the power to cancel the commandments of their prophets and even the law practiced by the alleged Son of God himself.


Let us look at this matter a little closer. God commanded the Jews to observe a very disciplined dietary regimen. This is where the Jews get the word "Kosher" from. "Kosher" refers to all food that it is permissible for a Jew to eat. Among those food that God forbade upon all Jews was swine. For this reason we find that Jesus (pbuh) considered pigs such filthy and disgusting animals that not only did he never taste their flesh (incidentally, Muslims also live out their lives never having tasted a single swine), but he literally considered them so lowly that they were only fit as garbage dumps for devils. In Matthew 8:31-32 we read


"So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.."


However, shortly after Jesus' departure, Paul makes lawful all of the creatures of the earth


"If any of them that believe not bid you [to a feast], and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake."

1 Corinthians 10:27


In one tragic moment, Jesus' lifetime of restraint was casually swept under the carpet.


Many people believe that the vision of Peter found in Acts was the primary factor in the cancellation of this fundamental law of the Jews. However, Christian scholars today are well aware that the writings of Paul are the oldest writings to be found in the Bible. They were written between 50-60 AD while even the four Gospels themselves were written decades later between 70-110 C.E. Secondly, the book of Acts (70-90 AD) although popularly considered to have been written by Paul, is now recognized to have been written by some unknown author(s) other than Paul but who was/were sympathetic to his cause.


According to the Bible, Jesus (pbuh) spent his whole life in strict adherence to the commandments of the law of Moses (pbuh). He departed leaving his followers with the following words:


"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, TILL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 5:17-19


Paul's dreams, however, have broken commandments right and left. There is so much of what Jesus (pbuh) did during his lifetime that his followers have now totally neglected, not because Jesus (pbuh) told them to break the commandments, but because Paul would later tell them to break them upon the authority of the visions he was receiving.


So, what we have concluded from the current view of Jesus' master plan is the following:


1) Jesus (pbuh) lived among his people for thirty three years showing them many miracles and teaching them to keep the commandments of Moses, to observe the Sabbath, to refrain from eating pork, to circumcise their children, to fast with the Jews, to worship in the synagogues, and so forth. He did not do this with his words alone but gave them an example in his own actions. Whenever he spoke about his miracles he claimed that he did them through "the finger of God" and that he "can of mine own self do nothing." Whenever he spoke of worship he would say "worship the Father" and not "worship me," "worship the Trinity," or "worship us." He also never said "I am a god." The term "son of God" was used by his people for many millennia before him to describe a devout servant of God and applied in the Bible to many prophets before him and even to common people. Further, God was understood by the people of his time to be the "Father" of all those who love him.

aenemy7

2) For three centuries after the departure of Jesus (pbuh), his apostles and their followers (excluding Paul and his followers) continued the tradition of Jesus (pbuh) as faithful Jews and followers of the law of Moses (pbuh). They practiced their worship in the synagogues of the Jews, they visited the Temple daily, and for all intents and purposes were indistinguishable from all other Jews except for the fact that they affirmed that Jesus (pbuh) was the promised Messiah, which many Jews did not (and still do not) accept. None of these people, not even Paul, had ever heard of a "Trinity." Jesus (pbuh) decided not to reveal his (and God's) "true" nature until three centuries after his departure. He decided that three centuries after his departure it would be time to come to the church and give them divine "inspiration" to "insert" verses in the Bible validating the "Trinity" (such as 1 John 5:7). These "inspired" revelations from Jesus are documented by Christian historians to have been continuing at least up till the fifteenth century CE (see above). Jesus also "inspired" them to utterly destroy all Gospels written before this fourth century which did not teach this "true" nature of Jesus as being God. He further "inspired" the church to utterly destroy all ancient manuscripts written in the original Aramaic or Hebrew language of Jesus (pbuh) and the apostles. He "inspired" them that the Greek and Latin manuscripts would be amply sufficient. And finally, he "inspired" them to launch a massive campaign of "inquiry" to "cleanse" the earth of all remaining Unitarian Christians or convert them.


3) When Jesus (pbuh) departed, his followers continued to faithfully follow his example and observe the laws of Moses. Now Paul comes along and persecutes the followers of Jesus every way he knows how. He admits that:


"For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it"

Galatians 1:13 (also see Acts 7:58-60, 8:1-3)


Now Jesus (pbuh) decides to bypass his apostles and go directly to the worst persecutor of his followers on earth in a "vision" and give him knowledge not available to the apostles. Paul now reveals that God holds all of mankind responsible for the sin of Adam (Romans 5:11-19, 1 Corinthians 15:22). God himself, however, claims long before Paul was ever born that


"The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin"

Deuteronomy 24:16.


and "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son"

Ezekiel 18:20


....etc.


4) Paul further revealed that Jesus came to him in visions and told him to nullify the commandments of God which he had spent thirty three years on earth upholding and teaching his followers to observe, and that these commandments "decayeth," were ready to "vanish away," and were a "curse" upon us. The only requirement in order to receive true salvation, according to Paul, is to believe in the original sin and the atonement. No actual work is necessary. This one belief is the only necessary and sufficient condition. However, Jesus departed not only never having violated the law of Moses but also having told his people that "till heaven and earth pass" whoever would dare to do so would be called "the least in the kingdom of God." Jesus (pbuh) was claimed to have been conditioned and prepared for "the atonement" from the beginning of time, however, whenever he was asked about the path to heaven he not only never mentioned any atonement but only (repeatedly) told his followers to "keep the commandments." Even when pressed for the path to perfection he only told his followers to sell their belongings.


5) Jesus never in his life saw fit to write a single inspired word. However, after he died, he started appearing to countless people in their dreams and visions and commanding them to write in his name and guiding their words. He did not see fit to guide their hands from writing conflicting versions of the same story (chapter two) since these contradictions were intended to strengthen a Christian's faith.


6) Since the only course to salvation is to accept the sacrifice of Jesus (pbuh) and the law of Moses is worthless, therefore, God did not see fit to allow those born before Jesus (pbuh) including countless previous prophets to enter heaven, but rather allowed them to remain stained with the sin of Adam and gave them a very strict and disciplined law that was totally useless and could never relieve them of this hereditary stain. These people shall never receive true salvation. Only those after Jesus (pbuh) will receive true salvation (Romans 3:28...etc.).



Allah Knows Best...
Peace Yall....

aenemy7

This was taken from; http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/musl ... -say/ch1.2.2.1.html


Matthew 28:19

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:"


If ex-President George Bush told General Norman Schwartzkopf to "Go ye therefore, and speak to the Iraqis, chastising them in the name of the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union," does this require that these three countries are one physical country? They may be one in purpose and in their goals but this does in no way require that they are the same physical entity.


Further, the "Great Commission" as narrated in the Gospel of Mark, bears no mention of the Father, Son and/or Holy Ghost (see Mark 16:15). As we shall see in chapter two, Christian historians readily admit that the Bible was the object of continuous "correction" and "addition" to bring it in line with established beliefs. They present many documented cases where words were "inserted" into a given verse to validate a given doctrine. Tom Harpur, former religion editor of the Toronto Star says:


"All but the most conservative of scholars agree that at least the latter part of this command was inserted later. The formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the only evidence available (the rest of the New Testament) that the earliest Church did not baptize people using these words - baptism was 'into' or 'in' the name of Jesus alone. Thus it is argued that the verse originally read 'baptizing them in my name' and then was expanded to work in the dogma. In fact, the first view put forward by German critical scholars as well as the Unitarians in the nineteenth century, was stated as the accepted position of mainline scholarship as long ago as 1919, when Peake's commentary was first published: 'The church of the first days did not observe this world-wide commandment, even if they new it. The command to baptize into the threefold name is a late doctrinal expansion.'"

"For Christ's sake," Tom Harpur, p. 103


This is confirmed in 'Peake's Commentary on the Bible' published since 1919, which is universally acclaimed and considered to be the standard reference for students of the Bible. It says:


"This mission is described in the language of the church and most commentators doubt that the Trinitarian formula was original at this point in Mt.'s Gospel, since the NT elsewhere does not know of such a formula and describes baptism as being performed in the name of the Lord Jesus (e.g. Ac. 2:38, 8:16, etc.)."


For example, these Christian scholars observed that after Jesus allegedly issued this command and then was taken up into heaven, the apostles displayed a complete lack of knowledge of this command.


"And Peter said to them, 'Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins;...'"

Acts 2:38.


These Christian scholars observed that it is extremely unlikely that if Jesus had indeed specifically commanded his apostles to "baptize in the name of the father and the son and the holy Ghost" that the apostles would later disobey his direct command and baptize only in the name of Jesus Christ, alone.


As a final piece of evidence, it is noted that after the departure of Jesus, when Paul decided to preach to the Gentiles, this resulted in a heated debate and a great difference of opinion between him and at least three of the apostles. This would not be the case if Jesus had, as claimed, openly commanded them to preach to the Gentiles (see section 6.13 for more). So we notice that not only does this verse never claim that the three are one, or even that the three are equal, but most scholars of Christianity today recognize that at the very least the last part of this verse ("the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost") was not originally part of the command of Jesus but was inserted by the church long after Jesus' departure.



Allah Knows Best...
Peace Yall...

aenemy7

Taken from; http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/musl ... -say/ch1.2.2.3.html


II Corinthians 13:14"

"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, [be] with you all. Amen."


If I say: "May the genius of Einstein, the philosophy of Descartes, and the strength of Schwarzenegger be with you all" does this require all three to be joined in a "Trinity"? Does it require that Einstein is Descartes (or a different "side" of Descartes)? Does it require that Descartes is Schwarzenegger (or a different "side" of Schwarzenegger)?



Allah Knows Best....
Peace Yall....

aenemy7

Taken from;  http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/musl ... -say/ch1.2.2.2.html


I Corinthians 12:4-6

"Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all."


If I were to say: "There are diversities of gifts, but the same Santa Claus. And there are differences of administrations, but the same government. And there are a diversity of operations, but the same God worketh all in all." Do God, the US government and Santa Claus now form another "Trinity"? Is this indeed how this verse was meant to be read? Is it impossible to receive "gifts," "administrations," and "operations" except from ONE person? There is a big difference between this verse and between saying "God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are one and the same." Even in the very best case, no one who reads I Corinthians 12:4-6 will claim that it explicitly states that the three are one, they themselves will have to admit that it only implies such a connection. So now we need to ask: Why would God Almighty need to resort to implying His triune nature if this is indeed what He intended? What is preventing Him from simply coming out and stating His intent clearly if this is indeed what He meant?


Why does everything have to be so abstract? If this is the true nature of God then why can't the Bible just come out and say "God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are physically joined in one being" or "God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are one and the same." Is this so very hard? Look at how much less space this would require. Look at how infinitely more clear and decisive that would be. Look at the clear cut decisiveness of Deuteronomy 4:39


"Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else."


God does not philosophize and speak all the way around matters. He speaks clearly and in no uncertain terms so that there can be no doubt as to what He meant. If God was indeed a Trinity why would He not simply just come out and say so, just as clearly and decisively as He does when He speaks about his uniqueness?



Allah Knows Best....
Peace Yall....

aenemy7

Taken from;  http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/musl ... say/ch1.2.2.12.html



A logical analysis

As we have seen at the very beginning of our analysis, Jesus (pbuh) has commanded us to "love the Lord thy God ... with all thy mind," Mark 12:30. We were also taught that "For God is not [the author] of confusion" 1 Corinthians 14:33.


So, if God's nature is not one of confusion, then it should not be necessary to command us to simply "have faith" in the Trinity because it is a "mystery." Is this not fair? Is this not what the Bible and Jesus himself say? So let us use our minds and be inquisitive. Let us ask questions so that we may indeed be able to truthfully claim that we have loved God "with all our minds."


Now, most Christians today are taught that because of Adam, all of humanity has inherited sin. This sin was so great that it could not be forgiven by any normal means. This sin was so great that God could not simply say "You are all forgiven." This sin was so great that even the sacrifice of a sinless mortal would not do. This sin was so great that it was necessary for God Almighty to offer up His only begotten son as the only possible purifying sacrifice for the sins of humanity. The only possible way for God to forgive humanity this tremendous sin was to have his son delivered to his mortal enemies so that they might beat him, spit on him, whip him, strip him, cut him, humiliate him, hang him up on the cross, and finally kill him. In this manner, God would finally be able to grant us the forgiveness He so wishes to bestow upon us. (1 Corinthians 15:3 "Christ died for our sins", Romans 5:6 "Christ died for the ungodly" etc.)


However, when we look closely at this picture we find a number of problems. For example, if Jesus (pbuh) is part of a divine Trinity which makes up the essence of God Almighty, and if this God is ONE God and not THREE gods, and if Jesus (pbuh) died on the cross, then what happened to God Almighty?. Did the Trinity die also, or was a third of the Trinity ripped away from the whole, then tortured, killed, and sent to hell for three days, while the remaining two thirds (of God?) remained in it's crippled form a safe distance away? Who was overseeing the heavens and the earth while all of this was happening? A crippled Trinity? No one? If I am made up of heart, mind, and soul, and one of them dies; what happens to the rest of me? Are they ONE or THREE? If God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are three names for the same being, (definition of the "Trinity" required by Isaiah 43:10-11 and many other verses) and not three separate gods, then the "death of Jesus" is just another way of saying "the death of God the 'Father'," which is also another way of saying "the death of the Holy Ghost."


Some members of the clergy will object that it was not Jesus "per se" who died, but rather it was only "his human form" that died. His "godly" form was not affected. It is described as one describes someone removing his coat. This leaves us with a dilemma, because it leaves us with one of two cases:


1) Either Jesus (pbuh) "himself" did NOT die, but only shed his earthly body (as it were), and in this case we must ask, where then is the great sacrifice in this shedding of a useless shell? Did we not just agree a few minutes ago that the sacrifice of a sinless mortal was not sufficient in order to erase the sins of all of humanity? Did we not just claim that it must be a sinless "GOD" that must die? How then is Jesus' shedding of this useless mortal shell which is not his actual essence an ultimate sacrifice in atonement for all of mankind's sins? How is it any different than the sacrifice of any normal human being? Did the death of Jesus' coat atone for the sins of all mankind? Can Jesus not simply make one thousand more human "shells" for himself to inhabit? Is his discarding of one of them an "ultimate sacrifice for the sins of all humanity"?


2) Or, Jesus (pbuh) "himself" died, in which case, since he is claimed to be part of the "Trinity", and the "Trinity" is claimed to be ONE god, not three (required by Isaiah 43:10-11, Deut. 4:35, 4:39, 1 Kings 8:60, Isaiah 45:5 and many other verses), then God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are all claimed to have died, since they are all "the same essence." Further, if all three are indeed ONE God then the death of this one God contradicts many verses such as:


"But the LORD is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting king."

Jeremiah 10:10


Also, if the giver of life is dead then who shall bring Him back to life? The only way out of this dilemma is to accept the truth, that Jesus (pbuh) was not God but only an elect messenger of God.


Remember when Jesus (pbuh) is alleged to have died?:


"And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost"

Luke 23:46


When people die they go to their Lord to be judged. If Jesus (pbuh) was, as claimed, a part of a Trinity and the Trinity is only ONE god (as required by the above verses), then Jesus was with God in a Trinity before his death. It was only after his death that he was claimed to have left God, died, and gone down into hell for three days. However, this verse tells us a completely different story. It claims that Jesus' essence was somewhere other than already with God while he was on earth (otherwise it would not have to go to Him) and was now going to God. Also read John 17:11: "…I come to thee. Holy Father." And John 17:13: "And now come I to thee"...etc.


Sadly enough, most Christians are taught to brush off these matters with words like "It is incomprehensible, that is why it must be true," or "believe blindly or you will lose your soul."? Have we so soon forgotten "For God is not of confusion" 1 Corinthians 14:33 ? Have we so soon forgotten "thou shalt love the Lord thy God ... with all thy mind," Mark 12:30?.


Many missionaries attempt to prove that God is "three" by drawing analogies between God and His creation. They say: "There are three members in a family, father, mother and children. There are three states for water, ice, water and steam, etc. Don't you see? God is three!"


Well, if this is the case then we need to notice that "Each person gets only one life. There is only one sun. There is only one earth. Each person only has one heart and one mind, etc."


Similarly, "We all have only two eyes. We all have only two ears. Days are split into two parts, morning and night, etc."


As we can see, following such tactics is indeed a frivolous pursuit. Such examples could be extended forever. We could say "There are four seasons in every year. There are five fingers on each hand. The Jews were only allowed by God to work for six days. There are seven days in every week, ..." but you get the picture.


Now, God Almighty is claimed to have "begotten" Jesus (pbuh). He is claimed to be the "father" of Jesus. Naturally a father is present before he "begets" his son (no matter how you wish to define "beget"). Before Jesus (pbuh) was "begotten," was the "Trinity" a "Duality"? Was God complete? Explain Isaiah 43:10-11. If Jesus (pbuh) was "begotten" then he is not eternal, but the definition of the Trinity which was first put together in 325 C.E. when the Trinity was first officially defined requires the "co-eternity" of God and Jesus (pbuh) (see below).


If Jesus is one face of a "Trinity" and the Trinity is one god not many, then anyone who sees Jesus has seen God, however, John 1:18 says


"No man hath seen God at any time."


And we have just read in the Athanasian creed (Nicean creed) that "God" is a "Trinity" made up of "the Father," the "Son," and the "Holy Ghost." We also read therein that God is not three gods but one God. If this is the case then anyone who has seen Jesus has seen "God." But the Bible tells us that this is not the case.


Jesus (pbuh) claims to not even know when "that day" is


"But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father"

Mark 13:32.


Is he not part of God? Is the "Trinity" not ONE god? The fact that one "personality" of God has knowledge not available to the other "two thirds" is a clear indication that they are distinct and separate beings, and not three faces of one being.


There are many such questions to be raised about this supposed Trinity which defy common sense. When someone loves God "with all thy mind" and they "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" are they not presented with countless contradictions regarding the "Trinity"? I am speaking about the logic of Jesus (pbuh) here and not blind faith. Jesus is beseeching us to use our minds but we would rather follow others who demand blind faith. Jesus (pbuh) tells us


"If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."

John 14:23.


Sadly, the same people who love him dearly have now been taught that in order to love Jesus they must completely disregard everything he ever taught his followers and must follow others who are better able to explain his message than himself. In effect, his words have been totally abandoned (see below).


"Say: 'O people of the Book! exceed not in your religion the bounds [of what is proper], trespassing beyond the truth, nor follow the vain desires of people who went astray in times gone by, who misled many, and strayed [themselves] from the straight path.'"

The noble Qur'an, Al-Maida(5):77




Allah Knows Best...
Peace Yall...