I
Ilocia
Guest
well do not buy anything… they sell cheap stuffs
- Status
P
paarsurrey
Guest
Hi
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi adds following argument in his book “Jesus in India” alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html
“Among the testimonies of the Bible in support of Jesus’ escape from death on the Cross is his journey to a far-off place, on which he started after coming out of the tomb. On the morning of Sunday he first met Mary Magdalene, who at once informed the disciples that Jesus was alive, but they did not believe it. Then he was seen by two of the disciples when they were going out to the countryside; and last of all he appeared to the eleven when they were at their meal and censured them for their callousness and lack of faith. When two disciples of Jesus were going towards the hamlet called Emmaus which was at a distance of 3.75 miles from Jerusalem, Jesus met them; and when they were near that hamlet, Jesus went forward to part company with them, but they did not allow him to go, saying that that night they would be together. He then dined with them, and all of them, along with Jesus, spent the night at the village named Emmaus. Now, to say that Jesus did all this with a spiritual body (which is supposed to be the nature of the body after death), which only the physical body was capable of doing, as, for example, eating and drinking, and sleeping, and making a long journey to Galilee which was at a distance of seventy miles from Jerusalem, is saying something impossible and quite against reason. In spite of the fact that on account of individual bias the accounts of the gospels have differed, the texts as they are, nevertheless, clearly show that Jesus met his disciples in the ordinary mortal human body, and made a long journey on foot to Galilee; showed his wounds to the disciples, dined with them at night, and slept in their company.
Now, here one has to consider whether, after acquiring an eternal spiritual body, i.e., after gaining that immortal body which entitled him, having been freed from the necessity of eating and drinking, to sit on the right hand of God and to be free of all wounds, and pain, and infirmities, it still suffered from one defect, although it had the glory of the Eternal and Ever-Existing God – the defect, namely, that his body had on it fresh wounds of the Cross and the nails, which were bleeding and were very painful and for which an ointment had been prepared, and even after acquiring a glorious and an immortal body, eternally sound, faultless, perfect, and unchangeable, that same body continued to suffer from defects of many kinds: Jesus himself showed to his disciples the flesh and bones of his body, and again, not only this, but there were also the pangs of hunger and thirst – necessities of the mortal body; otherwise, where was the need for him during the journey to Galilee to do such useless things as eating and drinking water, resting, and sleeping? Undoubtedly, hunger and thirst, in this world, are painful for the mortal body, which may even prove fatal if they become extreme. So there is no doubt that Jesus did not die on the Cross, nor did he acquire a new spiritual body: rather, he was in a state of death-like swoon. Through the grace of God, it so happened that the tomb in which he was placed was not like the tombs of this country; it was an airy apartment. In those days the custom of the Jews was to make the tomb airy like a commodious chamber, leaving an opening in it. Such tombs were kept ready; and as the occasion required, dead bodies were interred in them. The gospels bear clear testimony to this: Luke says, ‘Now upon the first day of the week very early in the morning * they * came unto the sepulchre bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre [just consider this!] and they entered in and found not the body of the Lord Jesus’. Now consider for a moment the words, ‘They entered in.’ It is evident that a man can only enter a tomb which is like a room and has an opening. I shall state in this book, at the proper place, that the tomb of Jesus (peace be on him) which has recently been discovered in Srinagar, in Kashmir, has an opening like this tomb. This is a fine point which when pondered over will lead investigators in this field to a great and important conclusion."
Unquote
Thanks**
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi adds following argument in his book “Jesus in India” alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html
“Among the testimonies of the Bible in support of Jesus’ escape from death on the Cross is his journey to a far-off place, on which he started after coming out of the tomb. On the morning of Sunday he first met Mary Magdalene, who at once informed the disciples that Jesus was alive, but they did not believe it. Then he was seen by two of the disciples when they were going out to the countryside; and last of all he appeared to the eleven when they were at their meal and censured them for their callousness and lack of faith. When two disciples of Jesus were going towards the hamlet called Emmaus which was at a distance of 3.75 miles from Jerusalem, Jesus met them; and when they were near that hamlet, Jesus went forward to part company with them, but they did not allow him to go, saying that that night they would be together. He then dined with them, and all of them, along with Jesus, spent the night at the village named Emmaus. Now, to say that Jesus did all this with a spiritual body (which is supposed to be the nature of the body after death), which only the physical body was capable of doing, as, for example, eating and drinking, and sleeping, and making a long journey to Galilee which was at a distance of seventy miles from Jerusalem, is saying something impossible and quite against reason. In spite of the fact that on account of individual bias the accounts of the gospels have differed, the texts as they are, nevertheless, clearly show that Jesus met his disciples in the ordinary mortal human body, and made a long journey on foot to Galilee; showed his wounds to the disciples, dined with them at night, and slept in their company.
Now, here one has to consider whether, after acquiring an eternal spiritual body, i.e., after gaining that immortal body which entitled him, having been freed from the necessity of eating and drinking, to sit on the right hand of God and to be free of all wounds, and pain, and infirmities, it still suffered from one defect, although it had the glory of the Eternal and Ever-Existing God – the defect, namely, that his body had on it fresh wounds of the Cross and the nails, which were bleeding and were very painful and for which an ointment had been prepared, and even after acquiring a glorious and an immortal body, eternally sound, faultless, perfect, and unchangeable, that same body continued to suffer from defects of many kinds: Jesus himself showed to his disciples the flesh and bones of his body, and again, not only this, but there were also the pangs of hunger and thirst – necessities of the mortal body; otherwise, where was the need for him during the journey to Galilee to do such useless things as eating and drinking water, resting, and sleeping? Undoubtedly, hunger and thirst, in this world, are painful for the mortal body, which may even prove fatal if they become extreme. So there is no doubt that Jesus did not die on the Cross, nor did he acquire a new spiritual body: rather, he was in a state of death-like swoon. Through the grace of God, it so happened that the tomb in which he was placed was not like the tombs of this country; it was an airy apartment. In those days the custom of the Jews was to make the tomb airy like a commodious chamber, leaving an opening in it. Such tombs were kept ready; and as the occasion required, dead bodies were interred in them. The gospels bear clear testimony to this: Luke says, ‘Now upon the first day of the week very early in the morning * they * came unto the sepulchre bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre [just consider this!] and they entered in and found not the body of the Lord Jesus’. Now consider for a moment the words, ‘They entered in.’ It is evident that a man can only enter a tomb which is like a room and has an opening. I shall state in this book, at the proper place, that the tomb of Jesus (peace be on him) which has recently been discovered in Srinagar, in Kashmir, has an opening like this tomb. This is a fine point which when pondered over will lead investigators in this field to a great and important conclusion."
Unquote
Thanks**
J
John_Lawrence
Guest
Even though your statement is emmenintly logical and practical, judging by your name and profile it seems you are simply here to pour garbage all over religion as a whole, or at least Judeo-Christian religion. If you have something academic to say, say it. But don’t purposely cause problems just because you think religion is the root of all “evil.”
A
adrift
Guest
As has been explained before, Jesus Resurrected body is Glorified Not a ordinary mortal human body. As proof, Jesus went through a locked door and appeared to the Apostles. He ate and drank not because He needed to but because He was proving that He was not a Spirit.
There were no fresh wounds and Jesus’ wounds were not bleeding no where in the Gospel accounts do they even infer this
No where does it say the Jesus had pangs of hunger and thirst He ate and drank not because He needed to but because He was proving that He was not a Spirit.
How ridiculous this fairy tale is. Again Jesus’ body was NOT spiritual but a Resurrected Glorified Body which hopefully one day we to will have when we are resurrected. According to your theory, Jesus underwent a horrendous torture did not die but was able to walk a great distance just three days later.:whacky: Your theorist did not mention that Jesus disappeared from site the moment His disciples recognized Him. Your theorist also erred when he said that Jesus spent the night with the disciples. But if your theorist was accurate, it would have destroyed his theory.
The tombs of the culture were caves.
P
paarsurrey
Guest
Hi
Please clarify certain points from your above post:
- What is a glorified body, spiritual body and the mortal body? Please define the distinctive features of the three from the OTBible, for clarification.
- Which door was locked? If you mean the stone that blocked the tomb, which was moved away I think. The question is who moved the stone and why?
- One would eat and drink for the need of the body, to get energy from the food for the body. Do the Catholics eat and drink to prove that they are not a spirit; they all have glorified bodies and don’t have mortal bodies. Any proof for that from the OTBible?
If Jesus needed to eat and drink after when he was, according to Catholics,** killed **on Cross then he should need it now.
If Jesus needed to eat and drink after when he was, according to Catholics, **killed **on Cross and appeared before the Catholic Apostles just to prove that he was not a Spirit; what made them doubt Jesus?
The Sign was for the Jews; Jesus should have eaten and drank with the Jews to prove that he was not a Spirit, if all it was necessary; that would had been an act of wisdom.
Now with a glorious body, as per Catholics; why was he afraid of Jews and remained afraid of Jews as he did everything secretly until he disappeared from Galilee alongwith his mother Mary to die a natural and peaceful death among the **lost tribes **of house of Israel in Sirinagar, Kashmir, in India, and is still buried there.
Moreover, Jonah did have am immortal body when he came out of the belly of the fish, if Jesus was to show a Sign like Jonah, he must not have had a glorious body , otherwise he should have not linked this Sign with Jonah.
Thanks
A
adrift
Guest
Not everything is in the OT. This was revealed in the New. We know about the Glorified Body because that is what Jesus had. A mortal body dies, a spirit has no body and after the resurrection when our soul is reunited with our body we will have a glorified body. Body
As I said in another thread you need to read the New Testament And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, approached, rolled back the stone, and sat upon it. However that is not what I was referring to
Mt 28:2-3
3.
No we do not have glorified bodies not yet
Jesus left the Apostles to authenticate His teachings. He left His Church to guide us. You make statements that are not rational.
Never said He needed it. We won’t need to eat and drink after we are raised from the dead but I guess we can if we want.
They saw Him DEAD. They knew He was dead. Until the resurrection the only time dead people came back was as a spirit. Jesus wanted to make sure they understood he rose from the dead.
The Apostles were Jews.
No where is it stated that Jesus was afraid. Nor is there any place that says all that He did in those forty days He remained until He Ascended into heaven
The only thing that was being referred to was the time that Jonah was in the whale stop trying to make more of it than was meant.
P
paarsurrey
Guest
Quote
aarsurrey:
The Sign was for the Jews; Jesus should have eaten and drank with the Jews to prove that he was not a Spirit, if all it was necessary; that would had been an act of wisdom.
aarsurrey:The Sign was for the Jews; Jesus should have eaten and drank with the Jews to prove that he was not a Spirit, if all it was necessary; that would had been an act of wisdom.
A
adrift
Guest
No I have not made a mistake. The Apostles were the ones commissioned by God to spread the Good News. The adulterous Jews had already rejected Him.Quote
The Sign was for the Jews; Jesus should have eaten and drank with the Jews to prove that he was not a Spirit, if all it was necessary; that would had been an act of wisdom.
Hi
I think you make a mistake, the Sign of Jonah, was not for the Apostles. The Sign of Jonah which JesusYeshuaIssa promised to show was for the **adulterous Jews **, but the Apostles were good Jews who followed Jesus, so the Sign was not meant for the Apostles, in the first place.
Thanks
P
paarsurrey
Guest
Hi
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi adds following argument in his book “Jesus in India” alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html
“Among the testimonies of the gospels are the words of Pilate, recorded by St. Mark: ‘And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, an honourable counsellor, who also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus. And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead.’ This would show that at the time of the crucifixion itself a doubt had been raised whether Jesus had in fact died and the doubt emanated from no less a person than one who knew from experience how long it took a person to die on the Cross.
Among the testimonies of the gospels is the verse, ‘The Jews, therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the Cross on the Sabbath day (for that Sabbath day was an high day), besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then came the soldiers and broke the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was dead already they broke not his legs: but one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water’. These verses clearly show that in order to put an end to the life of a crucified person it was the practice in those days to keep him on the Cross for several days, and then to break his legs, but the legs of Jesus were purposely not broken, and he was taken down alive from the Cross, like the two thieves. That was the reason why there came out blood when his side was pierced. The blood however, conceals after death. And, here, it appears also that all this was the result of a conspiracy. Pilate was a God-fearing and a good-hearted man; he could not openly show favour to Jesus for fear of the Caesar; for the Jews had declared Jesus a rebel. All the same, Pilate was lucky to have seen Jesus but the Caesar was not so fortunate; the former not only saw Jesus but also showed him a great favour – he did not desire that Jesus should suffer crucifixion. The gospels point out clearly that Pilate had several times resolved to let Jesus go, but the Jews said that if he would let him go he would be disloyal to Caesar; they also said that Jesus was a rebel who wished to be king. And the dream which Pilate’s wife had, further prompted the freeing of Jesus; otherwise, Pilate and his wife themselves would have been exposed to disaster. But, as the Jews were a mischievous people, ready even secretly to inform the Caesar of Pilate’s action, Pilate made use of a device to rescue Jesus: first, he fixed Friday for the crucifixion, only a few hours before sunset, and the night of the Great Sabbath was about to fall. Pilate knew very well that the Jews, in accordance with the commandments of their law, could keep Jesus on the Cross only till the evening, and after that it was unlawful to keep anybody on the Cross. Accordingly, it all happened in this very manner; and Jesus was taken down from the Cross before it was evening. It is improbable that the thieves who were crucified at the same time as Jesus should have remained alive, but that Jesus should have died within two hours. It was an excuse made up to save Jesus from the process of leg breaking. The fact that both the thieves were taken down alive from the Cross is sufficient evidence for an intelligent person: and taking down the victims alive from the Cross was the usual custom; they died only when their bones were broken, or when they were allowed to remain on the Cross without food or drink for some days. But Jesus had none of these experiences – he neither remained for any number of days on the Cross, nor were his bones broken; and by making it appear that Jesus had died the Jews were made to forget the whole matter. The thieves, however, were killed immediately – their bones were broken. It would have been different if it had been said in regard to one of the thieves also that he was dead and that there was no need to break his bones. And a man named Joseph – an honoured friend of Pilate and a notable person in the locality and a secret disciple of Jesus – presented himself at the right time. I suspect that he too was called at Pilate’s suggestion. And Jesus having been taken for dead, his body was made over to him, for he was a big man with whom the Jews could have no quarrel. Arriving at the scene he carried away Jesus as if he were a corpse.”
Unquote
Thanks
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi adds following argument in his book “Jesus in India” alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html
“Among the testimonies of the gospels are the words of Pilate, recorded by St. Mark: ‘And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, an honourable counsellor, who also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus. And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead.’ This would show that at the time of the crucifixion itself a doubt had been raised whether Jesus had in fact died and the doubt emanated from no less a person than one who knew from experience how long it took a person to die on the Cross.
Among the testimonies of the gospels is the verse, ‘The Jews, therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the Cross on the Sabbath day (for that Sabbath day was an high day), besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then came the soldiers and broke the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was dead already they broke not his legs: but one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water’. These verses clearly show that in order to put an end to the life of a crucified person it was the practice in those days to keep him on the Cross for several days, and then to break his legs, but the legs of Jesus were purposely not broken, and he was taken down alive from the Cross, like the two thieves. That was the reason why there came out blood when his side was pierced. The blood however, conceals after death. And, here, it appears also that all this was the result of a conspiracy. Pilate was a God-fearing and a good-hearted man; he could not openly show favour to Jesus for fear of the Caesar; for the Jews had declared Jesus a rebel. All the same, Pilate was lucky to have seen Jesus but the Caesar was not so fortunate; the former not only saw Jesus but also showed him a great favour – he did not desire that Jesus should suffer crucifixion. The gospels point out clearly that Pilate had several times resolved to let Jesus go, but the Jews said that if he would let him go he would be disloyal to Caesar; they also said that Jesus was a rebel who wished to be king. And the dream which Pilate’s wife had, further prompted the freeing of Jesus; otherwise, Pilate and his wife themselves would have been exposed to disaster. But, as the Jews were a mischievous people, ready even secretly to inform the Caesar of Pilate’s action, Pilate made use of a device to rescue Jesus: first, he fixed Friday for the crucifixion, only a few hours before sunset, and the night of the Great Sabbath was about to fall. Pilate knew very well that the Jews, in accordance with the commandments of their law, could keep Jesus on the Cross only till the evening, and after that it was unlawful to keep anybody on the Cross. Accordingly, it all happened in this very manner; and Jesus was taken down from the Cross before it was evening. It is improbable that the thieves who were crucified at the same time as Jesus should have remained alive, but that Jesus should have died within two hours. It was an excuse made up to save Jesus from the process of leg breaking. The fact that both the thieves were taken down alive from the Cross is sufficient evidence for an intelligent person: and taking down the victims alive from the Cross was the usual custom; they died only when their bones were broken, or when they were allowed to remain on the Cross without food or drink for some days. But Jesus had none of these experiences – he neither remained for any number of days on the Cross, nor were his bones broken; and by making it appear that Jesus had died the Jews were made to forget the whole matter. The thieves, however, were killed immediately – their bones were broken. It would have been different if it had been said in regard to one of the thieves also that he was dead and that there was no need to break his bones. And a man named Joseph – an honoured friend of Pilate and a notable person in the locality and a secret disciple of Jesus – presented himself at the right time. I suspect that he too was called at Pilate’s suggestion. And Jesus having been taken for dead, his body was made over to him, for he was a big man with whom the Jews could have no quarrel. Arriving at the scene he carried away Jesus as if he were a corpse.”
Unquote
Thanks
A
adrift
Guest
Jesus was on the cross for six hours. Before He was executed, He was scourged. Scourging alone killed. The soldiers only broke legs to hurry death. Without the ability to push themselves up a person being crucified could not breath.
I don’t understand this what are you saying?
Are you saying no one died?
A
adrift
Guest
I came across these two web sites that pertain to our discussion
What Happened in 30 AD
What Happened in 30 AD
What Happened to the Body of Jesus
P
paarsurrey
Guest
Hi
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi adds following argument in his book “Jesus in India” alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html
"And a man named Joseph – an honoured friend of Pilate and a notable person in the locality and a secret disciple of Jesus – presented himself at the right time. I suspect that he too was called at Pilate’s suggestion. And Jesus having been taken for dead, his body was made over to him, for he was a big man with whom the Jews could have no quarrel. Arriving at the scene he carried away Jesus as if he were a corpse. Actually he was in a state of swoon.
There was a spacious house near by, built according to the custom of the time like a tomb, with an opening in it, and situated at a place with which the Jews had nothing to do. Jesus was placed in this house at the suggestion of Pilate. These events happened in the fourteenth century after the death of Moses; and, Jesus was the Restorer of the Israelite law in the fourteenth century. Though the Jews were looking out in this fourteenth century for the Promised Messiah, and the prophecies of the previous prophets also pointed to this very time for his appearance, yet, alas! the unworthy priests of the Jews did not recognise the time and the season, and rejected the Promised Messiah as an impostor.
Not only this; they declared him a Kafir, called him an unbeliever, pronounced the decree of death against him, and dragged him into court. This showed that God had assembled in the fourteenth century the influences which made the people’s hearts callous, the priests worldly, blind, and enemies of truth. Yet, a comparison between the fourteenth century after Moses and the fourteenth after the ‘like’ of Moses – our Holy Prophet (may peace and the blessings of God be upon him) – will show, first that in each of these centuries there was a man who claimed to be the promised Messiah; a true claim resting on the authority of God.
Then, it would also appear that the priests of the people declared both of them Kafirs, and called them unbelievers and Dajjals, and pronounced Fatwas of death against them, and dragged them into court – a Roman court in one case and a British in the other. Ultimately, both were rescued; and the priests – the Jews and the Muslims – were foiled in their designs. God had intended to raise great communities for both the Messiahs, and to defeat the designs of their enemies, In short, the fourteenth century after Moses and the fourteenth century after our Holy Prophet (peace and the blessings of God be upon him) are for their respective Messiahs trying, as well as – in the long run – blessed.
Among the testimonies which show that Jesus (peace be on him) was saved from the Cross is the one narrated in Matthew, chapter 26, verses 36 to 46, which relate that after getting information, through revelation, of his impending arrest, Jesus prayed to God all night, on his face, and in tears, and such prayer offered with such humility, and for which Jesus had ample time, could not go unaccepted; for the cry of an elect of God, addressed at a time of distress, is never turned down.
How was it then, that the prayer of Jesus which he had addressed all night with a painful heart and in a state of distress was rejected? Jesus had said: The Father who is in heaven listens to me."
Unquote
Thanks
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi adds following argument in his book “Jesus in India” alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html
"And a man named Joseph – an honoured friend of Pilate and a notable person in the locality and a secret disciple of Jesus – presented himself at the right time. I suspect that he too was called at Pilate’s suggestion. And Jesus having been taken for dead, his body was made over to him, for he was a big man with whom the Jews could have no quarrel. Arriving at the scene he carried away Jesus as if he were a corpse. Actually he was in a state of swoon.
There was a spacious house near by, built according to the custom of the time like a tomb, with an opening in it, and situated at a place with which the Jews had nothing to do. Jesus was placed in this house at the suggestion of Pilate. These events happened in the fourteenth century after the death of Moses; and, Jesus was the Restorer of the Israelite law in the fourteenth century. Though the Jews were looking out in this fourteenth century for the Promised Messiah, and the prophecies of the previous prophets also pointed to this very time for his appearance, yet, alas! the unworthy priests of the Jews did not recognise the time and the season, and rejected the Promised Messiah as an impostor.
Not only this; they declared him a Kafir, called him an unbeliever, pronounced the decree of death against him, and dragged him into court. This showed that God had assembled in the fourteenth century the influences which made the people’s hearts callous, the priests worldly, blind, and enemies of truth. Yet, a comparison between the fourteenth century after Moses and the fourteenth after the ‘like’ of Moses – our Holy Prophet (may peace and the blessings of God be upon him) – will show, first that in each of these centuries there was a man who claimed to be the promised Messiah; a true claim resting on the authority of God.
Then, it would also appear that the priests of the people declared both of them Kafirs, and called them unbelievers and Dajjals, and pronounced Fatwas of death against them, and dragged them into court – a Roman court in one case and a British in the other. Ultimately, both were rescued; and the priests – the Jews and the Muslims – were foiled in their designs. God had intended to raise great communities for both the Messiahs, and to defeat the designs of their enemies, In short, the fourteenth century after Moses and the fourteenth century after our Holy Prophet (peace and the blessings of God be upon him) are for their respective Messiahs trying, as well as – in the long run – blessed.
Among the testimonies which show that Jesus (peace be on him) was saved from the Cross is the one narrated in Matthew, chapter 26, verses 36 to 46, which relate that after getting information, through revelation, of his impending arrest, Jesus prayed to God all night, on his face, and in tears, and such prayer offered with such humility, and for which Jesus had ample time, could not go unaccepted; for the cry of an elect of God, addressed at a time of distress, is never turned down.
How was it then, that the prayer of Jesus which he had addressed all night with a painful heart and in a state of distress was rejected? Jesus had said: The Father who is in heaven listens to me."
Unquote
Thanks
I
inJESUS
Guest
So what is it now? Kashmir? America? Japan? oh maybe Russia:shrug: lol naaaa you know what? am Lebanese… so i vote Lebanon hilarious what people are willing to believe despite history…be it muslims or ahmadiyya
hilarious what people are willing to believe despite history…be it muslims or ahmadiyya
D
dolphinlove
Guest
Nahhhhhhh you got it all wrong, it was Australia.So what is it now? Kashmir? America? Japan? oh maybe Russia:shrug: lol naaaa you know what? am Lebanese… so i vote Lebanon
R
Rodrigo_Bivar
Guest
Am I the only one to find that a tad anachronistic?
A British court in the 1st century?
I know Mirza Ghulam Ahmad lived during the British Raj but that claim must surely be questionable to say the least.
P
paarsurrey
Guest
Hi
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi adds following argument in his book “Jesus in India” alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html
Jesus had said: The Father who is in heaven listens to me. Therefore, when his prayer addressed in such a state of distress was not heard, how can it be said that God heard his prayers? The gospels also show that Jesus (peace be on him) was certain at heart that his prayer had been accepted; he had great confidence in that prayer. That is why when he was arrested and put on the Cross, and when he found the circumstances not according to his expectations, he involuntarily cried ‘Eli, Eli lama sabachthani’, meaning, ‘My God, my God why hast Thou forsaken me.’, i.e., he did not expect that it would come to this – that he would die on the Cross. He believed that his prayer would be heard.
So, both these references to the gospel show that Jesus firmly believed that his prayer would be heard and accepted, that his tearful supplications addressed throughout the night would not be wasted, whereas he had himself taught his disciples, on divine authority: When you pray, the prayer will be accepted. Further, he had also narrated the parable of the judge who feared neither man nor God. The purpose of this parable was that the disciples should realise that God undoubtedly answered prayers. Although Jesus knew from God that there was a great affliction in store for him, yet, like all righteous persons, he prayed to God, believing that there was nothing impossible for God and that God determined whether any events would happen or not.
Therefore, the rejection of Jesus’ own prayer would have shaken the faith of the disciples. Was it possible to place before the disciples an example destructive of their faith? If they had seen with their own eyes that the prayer of a great prophet like Jesus, addressed all night with burning passion, was not accepted, the unfortunate example would have been very trying for their faith. Therefore, the Merciful God could not but have accepted this prayer. It is certain the prayer offered at Gethsemane was accepted.
There is another point in this connection. Just as there was a conspiracy to kill Jesus, and for this propose the chief priests and the scribes assembled together at the palace of the high priest called Caiaphas to devise a plan to kill Jesus, so there was a conspiracy to murder Moses, and, likewise, there was a secret consultation in Mecca at the place called Dar-ul-Nadwa to murder our Holy Prophet (peace and the blessings of God be upon him). But the powerful God saved both these great prophets from evil designs.
The conspiracy against Jesus was, in point of time, in between the other two. Then, why was not Jesus saved when he had prayed more vehemently than either? Why was not Jesus’ prayer heard, when God hears the prayers of His beloved servants and frustrates the plans of the wicked? All the righteous know by experience that the prayer of the distressed and the afflicted is accepted; nay, the hour of affliction, for a righteous person, is the hour for a sign.
Unquote
Thanks
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi adds following argument in his book “Jesus in India” alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html
Jesus had said: The Father who is in heaven listens to me. Therefore, when his prayer addressed in such a state of distress was not heard, how can it be said that God heard his prayers? The gospels also show that Jesus (peace be on him) was certain at heart that his prayer had been accepted; he had great confidence in that prayer. That is why when he was arrested and put on the Cross, and when he found the circumstances not according to his expectations, he involuntarily cried ‘Eli, Eli lama sabachthani’, meaning, ‘My God, my God why hast Thou forsaken me.’, i.e., he did not expect that it would come to this – that he would die on the Cross. He believed that his prayer would be heard.
So, both these references to the gospel show that Jesus firmly believed that his prayer would be heard and accepted, that his tearful supplications addressed throughout the night would not be wasted, whereas he had himself taught his disciples, on divine authority: When you pray, the prayer will be accepted. Further, he had also narrated the parable of the judge who feared neither man nor God. The purpose of this parable was that the disciples should realise that God undoubtedly answered prayers. Although Jesus knew from God that there was a great affliction in store for him, yet, like all righteous persons, he prayed to God, believing that there was nothing impossible for God and that God determined whether any events would happen or not.
Therefore, the rejection of Jesus’ own prayer would have shaken the faith of the disciples. Was it possible to place before the disciples an example destructive of their faith? If they had seen with their own eyes that the prayer of a great prophet like Jesus, addressed all night with burning passion, was not accepted, the unfortunate example would have been very trying for their faith. Therefore, the Merciful God could not but have accepted this prayer. It is certain the prayer offered at Gethsemane was accepted.
There is another point in this connection. Just as there was a conspiracy to kill Jesus, and for this propose the chief priests and the scribes assembled together at the palace of the high priest called Caiaphas to devise a plan to kill Jesus, so there was a conspiracy to murder Moses, and, likewise, there was a secret consultation in Mecca at the place called Dar-ul-Nadwa to murder our Holy Prophet (peace and the blessings of God be upon him). But the powerful God saved both these great prophets from evil designs.
The conspiracy against Jesus was, in point of time, in between the other two. Then, why was not Jesus saved when he had prayed more vehemently than either? Why was not Jesus’ prayer heard, when God hears the prayers of His beloved servants and frustrates the plans of the wicked? All the righteous know by experience that the prayer of the distressed and the afflicted is accepted; nay, the hour of affliction, for a righteous person, is the hour for a sign.
Unquote
Thanks
K
kellie
Guest
paarsurrey, You seem to have the whole concept of God so wrong.
God hears our prayers, but sometimes does not answer them the way we expect.
If I pray to God, to ask Him for help with getting a new car, He may not necessarily ensure I get a new car, but He may answer my prayers some other way, like finding me a new job closer to home so I dont need to use my old car for long distances (this is just a basic example I thought of).
Another misunderstanding of what this passage in the Bible is all about.
Jesus was quoting from the Psalms in the OT, specifically Psalm 22, which starts off as a lament, then ends in praise. americancatholic.org/Messenger/Apr2004/Feature1.asp
Get your facts right first paarsurrey. Learn from scholars of the Bible before starting to tell us what it all means
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
paarsurrey; Can you see the forest? Or are the trees in the way?
Jesus had to suffer; It was God’s will (Is. 53:10). Without the suffering, it wouldn’t be act of love.
God can not answer all of prayers. What a catastrophe it would be if He did; We would become the masters, and He would become the servant.
The best way God could have answered His prayer in this situation was to send him an angel to comfort Him (Lk 22:43).
- Status