then along came christianity, and for the past 2000 years, man has been set back in many ways. why is this?

I still don't see why you think Islam is "in much less turmoil" than Christianity.

How is Islam any better that Christianity??
[right][snapback]630701[/snapback][/right]

it is the completion of the line of prophets. it completes the tales. the need for a final (seal) prophet shows the incompleteness of christianity.

christianity is in a non-enviable position. like all middle chapters of trilogies, it has no real beginning or ending.
[right][snapback]630727[/snapback][/right]

it is the completion of the line of prophets. it completes the tales. the need for a final (seal) prophet shows the incompleteness of christianity.

christianity is in a non-enviable position. like all middle chapters of trilogies, it has no real beginning or ending.
[right][snapback]630727[/snapback][/right]

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0062/0062_01.asp
True story of the founding of Islam at that website. Prepare to be surprised!
[right][snapback]630739[/snapback][/right]

Thanks for the story.
[right][snapback]630773[/snapback][/right]

prepare to see what a christian bias (aimed at promoting christianity) will do.

i suggest going to a credible unbiased source if you want to understand the three religions and the line of prophets that created them.
[right][snapback]630783[/snapback][/right]

now you and other christians always come on here talking about how god is timeless and 1000 years is nothing to him, so why would it be a surprise if time passed between prophets?  besides, in the grand plan of the god, there needed to be time for man to follow the dark book... it was and is part of the master plan for the god to lead his enemies to destruction (christianity is the route to destruction).
[right][snapback]630868[/snapback][/right]

as for wives and riches:  look at the historical context.  men were allowed to take many wives because of the need to care for women and children who lost husbands - not to create harems like western movies show. as for riches, there is nothing wrong with riches so long as one contributes part of the riches back to society - one of the 5 pillars.  it makes more sense to allow man to achieve riches and continue to contribute back to his society than to abandon all riches and live like a bum unable to contribute back! there is a difference between having riches and idolizing them.  a very big difference indeed!
[right][snapback]630868[/snapback][/right]

Then why wouldn't Jews recognize Muhammud?

Then why wouldn't Jews recognize Muhammud? And its not just the whole bloodline thing, there is more to it than that. You would think the Jews would at least recognize him.
[right][snapback]630911[/snapback][/right]

First off, they recognize Jesus as a prophet. However, they say he is not the son of God.

Soooo...wouldn't this make him false?

For the same reason that the majority of Hebrews didn't recognize Jesus as the Son of God?
Because they were firm in their beliefs as handed down by their elders.
[right][snapback]631106[/snapback][/right]

Its funny how you are taking the same arguements that atheists use against your beliefs, and applying them to the Muslim faith.
[right][snapback]631106[/snapback][/right]

600 years?  "God is timeless.  god is non-linear, and time means nothing."  Sound familiar?[right][snapback]631106[/snapback][/right]

And you seem surprised that the Muslims recognize the carpenters son as a prophet, but not the son of god.  Perhaps, since we only have jsesus words reported as second hand evidence, we really have no way to tell if he in fact, claimed to be the son of god.
[right][snapback]631106[/snapback][/right]

Wait... how would that make someone a false prophet? Is Moses a false prophet because he is not the son of god?
[right][snapback]631133[/snapback][/right]

A prophet who lies, or prophesizes something that is not true is "false." Jesus said many things. He prophesized him being resurrected from the dead, and his return to the earth (Armageddon.)

Moses on the other hand, never said he was the son of God, nor did any other prophet. (Except for Jesus.)

Ahh, but your logic is faulty. You're working off of the bible. Maybe Islam says that Jesus didnt call himself the son of god? That the Jesus in the bible is a character corrupted by writers and editors?
[right][snapback]632433[/snapback][/right]

something i thought up while out running today:

Man was advancing fairly well up into about 2000 years ago.

The egyptians were well advanced.
The Jews had their laws which many still stand the test of modern knowlege today.

then along came christianity, and for the past 2000 years, man has been set back in many ways.  why is this?

here is a concept based on the ideals of the monotheistic religions:

god had his chosen people (as many debates on this thread come back to) that he sternly ruled over and came across a a rather nasty fellow.

now much of the OT talks of the transgrssors, and the punishment of the non-believers, yet the god was never able to expunge the planet of these other tribes.  So what is the ultimate solution for a powerful being then?  Simpley, to create a false god for the outsiders to worship and falsely idolize that will lead them to their own destruction (i have always seen this god as a deceiver, so this is no stretch).

So he gives the heathens that what they want in jesus, thus creating the false prophet.  This is followed by the years of man's regression and indecision.

Now after a while the god thinks he will offer a second chance to the transgressors of his tribes, so he gives man muhammad, who goes on to lead people to some form of enlightenment while the followers of jesus continue to stew in termoil.

So now we have today, the chosen people, the idolizers of a false god, and the redeemed.  All under the thumb of the same god, making him happy.  This also fits with the idea that a "one god" singular force of all must be all, and through this approach we see his two sides (what the laymen call good and evil).


[right][snapback]630483[/snapback][/right]

Millions of the "Muslims" were Christians prior to Muhammud coming. These people believed that Jesus was the son of God. Then Muhammud rose up and told these people that Jesus was not the son of God.

If this man was a true prophet from God, I doubt it would have been a 600 year gap in between Jesus and Muhammud. Considering that Jesus had such a huge impact on people.

Also, I highly doubt he would have taken over 9 wives at the same time, so in turn he doesn't practice what he preaches.

So, you must ask yourself IF God had truly sent Jesus as a prophet only resulting in him saying he was the son of God (which Muhammud says was a lie), why would he wait 600 years later to send another prophet to tell the people that Jesus was only half telling the truth?

Futhermore, wouldn't this make Jesus a liar?

I have a slight problem with the following statement:

Millions of the "Muslims" were Christians prior to Muhammud coming. These people believed that Jesus was the son of God. Then Muhammud rose up and told these people that Jesus was not the son of God.


Can someone provide some documentary evidence on this number?  Because it seems a bit high.  As a matter of fact, unbelievably high.
[right][snapback]632655[/snapback][/right]

Millions of the "Muslims" were Christians prior to Muhammud coming. These people believed that Jesus was the son of God. Then Muhammud rose up and told these people that Jesus was not the son of God.

and note that while the dark ages went on under christianity, science progessed under islam.
[right][snapback]632616[/snapback][/right]

????

what happened to Jenna?
[right][snapback]632916[/snapback][/right]

damn, i dunno, i like the top one. She is hot.

where did the crazy lookin one come from?
[right][snapback]632921[/snapback][/right]

Man thats freaky. I'm glad I don't have to wake up to that thing every morning, i guess my ex gf wasnt so bad after all.
[right][snapback]632924[/snapback][/right]

lastly, unlike the christians that elevate jesus to god status, so therefore jesus must be perfect (which we know he was not - one of the great faults of christianity ), muhammad was a man and only a man.  muhammad was more akin to a scientist of today:  a great scientist could introduce a theory that changes man's understanding of the universe, and the credibility of that paper is not affected by his personal life (well, other than the usual effects of politics).
[right][snapback]632480[/snapback][/right]

Jesus, The Imperfect Beacon--For two thousand years Christians have alleged that Jesus of Nazareth is God incarnate, the sinless being, the embodiment of perfection.

1Pet. 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

Isa. 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

Yet, the New Testament has many statements and acts by Jesus which prove the contrary. He, like Paul, repeatedly made false statements and inaccurate prophecies. Here are a few examples:

John 7:8-10[KJV] Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

John 7:8-10 RSV Go to the festival yourselves. I am not going to this festival, for my time has not yet fully come." After saying this, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone to the festival, then he also went, not publicly but as it were in private.

Jesus broke his promise[word] by going up secretly after saying he wouldn't.


( In John 13:38 jesus said: "...Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The c*** shall not crow, till thou (Peter-ed) hast denied me thrice."

And yet, what actually occurred is shown in Mark 14:66-68

"And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the c*** crew."

According to Jesus' prophecy the c*** was not to speak until after the third denial, not after the first.


© Jesus told the thief on the cross: Luke 23:43 "... Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise."

This prophecy could not have been kept unless Jesus went to heaven that day, in which case he would not have been buried for three days.


(D) Jesus told a man: Mark 8:34 "... Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."

This statement was made early in his ministry. Yet, the cross could not have become a Christian symbol until after the Crucifixion. There would be nothing to pick up. This utterance would have made no sense whatever to the man being addressed.


(E) In Matthew 5:22 he said:

Matt. 5:22 "...but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."

Yet, Jesus repeated called people fools: Matt. 23:17,19 "Ye fools and blind..." Luke 11:40 "Ye fools,..."


(F) In Matthew Jesus said: Matt. 12:40 " For as Jonas 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."

Mark 15:37 and 15:42 show Jesus died on the day before the sabbath which would be Friday. Mark 16:9 and Matthew 28:1 show he allegedly rose sometime during Saturday night or Sunday morning. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning does not encompass three days and three nights. His prophecy failed.


(G) John 3:13 Jesus falsely stated: "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."

This verse is not only inaccurate historically as 2 Kings 2:11 shows: 2 Kings 2:11"...behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." but also absurd on its face. If the son of man (Jesus-ed) is down here on earth speaking then how could he be in heaven.


(H) And in Matthew 27:46 Jesus cried with a loud voice say: " Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

How could Jesus be Savior of all mankind when he couldn't even save himself. These aren't the words of a man who went to the Cross willingly to die for our sins. These are the words of a man who could think of a hundred places he would rather be. They certainly the words of someone who has the situation under control.

These examples of Jesus' duplicity represent only a fraction of the 193 that could have been presented The New Testament provides more than enough evidence to demonstrate Jesus' inability to provide a reliable beacon to lighten the way to truth and honesty, to claim the Messiahship. As Thomas Paine said: "The priests of the present day profess to believe it (the story of Christ-ed). They gain their living by it, and they exclaim against something they call infidelity. I will define what it (ifidelity-ed) is. HE THAT BELIEVES IN THE STORY OF CHRIST IS AN INFIDEL TO GOD." (The Life and Works of Thomas Paine, Vol 9, page 292)

Jesus is not perfection incarnate. As Robert Ingersoll once said: "The theological Christ is the impossible union of the human and divine-man with the attributes of God and God with the weakness of man."

In closing this month's commentary several contradictions are worthy of note. Joseph's father is Jacob in Matthew 1:16 but is Heli in Luke 3:23. David slew the men of 700 chariots of the Syrians and 40,000 horsemen according to 2 Samuel 10:18 while 1 Chron. 19:18 says it was the men of 7,000 chariots and 40,000 footmen. Solomon had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots in 1 Kings 4:26 while 2 Chron. 9:25 says it was 4,000 stalls.

Jesus, The Imperfect Beacon--For two thousand years Christians have alleged that Jesus of Nazareth is God incarnate, the sinless being, the embodiment of perfection.

1Pet. 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

Isa. 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

Yet, the New Testament has many statements and acts by Jesus which prove the contrary. He, like Paul, repeatedly made false statements and inaccurate prophecies. Here are a few examples:

John 7:8-10[KJV] Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

John 7:8-10 RSV Go to the festival yourselves. I am not going to this festival, for my time has not yet fully come." After saying this, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone to the festival, then he also went, not publicly but as it were in private.

Jesus broke his promise[word] by going up secretly after saying he wouldn't.[/right]

John 7:3-4 NIV Jesus' brothers said to him, "You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do.  no one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret.  Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world."

Jesus' brothers wanted him to go to the festival (the Feast of Tabernacles) and publicly display Himself to the people of Galilee.  For this reason Jesus said in verse 8 "my time has not yet come".  Not because He wouldn't go to the festival, but because He wouldn't go "publicly" ie to be seen and revered.



The corresponding accounts in Matthew, Luke and John say nothing of this first rooster crow.

In addition, only some manuscripts from Mark make mention of this. But perhaps Mark did get his facts wrong in this instance...

Whatever the case, the point is that Jesus predicted Peter's denial, showing Himself to be able to see the future.



Only His body was buried. He, as in Jesus' spirit, did go to heaven. It was only three days later that He was "physically" resurrected.



None-the-less, the people still knew what crucifixion was. When someone follows Jesus, they must be prepared to crucify (kill) their old way of life. I fail to see why this is not a valid statement...

Additionally, this post was in relation to the statement "Jesus must be perfect (which we know he was not...)". There's a "contradictions to the Bible thread somewhere else. It'd be good if you could confine your quotes to verses that show (to you at least) how Jesus was not perfect.



Matthew 5:21-22 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder', and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment. But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment."

Jesus was giving this sermon on the Mount in direct opposition to the legalistic attitude that the Pharisees had towards the Bible. It was ok to hate your brother, as long as you didn't kill him...

The distinction was being made between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law, that is to say, hate=murder in God's eyes. When Jesus said "You fools", he did not do it out of hate for his listeners, but rather out of love - to point out what they were doing wrong



The festival of Passover is also considered to be a Sabbath. Since Jesus was crucified at Passover, is it not reasonable to assume that the "day before the Sabbath" (Mark 15:42) was referring to the day before Passover, which could have been any day of the week.

It is only modern tradition that keeps the belief that Friday was the crucifixion.



Most theologians see John 3:13 as a prophecy of the future, the way He descended and the way in which He returned at the Ascension. And no one has done that except Jesus.

As to Jesus being both in heaven and on earth, I got just one word... Trinity.



My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?...

Jesus was quoting the opening verse of Psalm 22. This psalm was written by David, when he was hiding from Saul who was trying to kill him. David starts off by saying "my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Psalm 22:1). The Psalm ends however with David essentially saying "It looks like you've forsaken me, but I know better - you God, really are in control and have not forsaken me". And the important thing to note is that the people watching Jesus all knew the Old Testament (ok, maybe some of the Roman soldiers didn't, but everyone else would have). They were brought up with it. This Psalm (and its meaning) would have been the first thing to pop into their head.

"How could Jesus be Savior of all mankind when he couldn't even save himself" - is this implying that Jesus cannot be the Saviour because He died on the cross???

And of course there were a hundred places Jesus would have rather been. What's the point?



Same point as before - this has nothing to do with Jesus being (or not being) perfect. If you really want answers, I suggest you read the "contradictions in the Bible" thread. These questions have all been answered there.

Until next time,
[right][snapback]634241[/snapback]

too lazy to type so i will use an external source for your proof of jesus' imperfections, ok?


http://members.aol.com/ckbloomfld/bepart11.html
[right][snapback]634241[/snapback][/right]

I answered many "contradictions" like these in the "101 Contradictions and the Bible" thread. Matter of fact, I think all of these you included were in it.

Not very clearly if at all. Also as I told you in that thread I have a total of 339 Contradictions.
[right][snapback]634518[/snapback][/right]