B
Bahman
Guest
I would be happy to hear your arguments there.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
A
alchemist3
Guest
How exactly does that work? Buddhist follow the Buddha and none of them believe that he was G-D. Taoist follow Lao-Tzu and none of them believe he was God. Socratics follow Socrates but don’t believe he was G-d. A person does not have to be G-d in order to have excellent ideas and moral teachings. Heck many “christians” don’t even really believe that Jesus was God but can still follow his teachings and moral example. This is how we function in life, we see behavior or read about ideas that are attractive to us and that we wish to emulate in our own lives. We see attributes in our parents and role models and teachers etc, that we want to possess ourselves, and then we do the things necessary to acquire those attributes.If Jesus Christ was not God, then there is no reason we should believe what others say about, so called, prophets, wise men, etc. no matter what tradition they come from. Because that is like a dog chasing its tail.
Linus2nd
D
davidv
Guest
Based on your prior response to my arguments, I don’t think you are very happy to hear them. For my perspective there has been a lack of discussion of the basic problems with the OP. Instead of addressing them, new topics are introduced that confuse rather than clarify.I would be happy to hear your arguments there.
In this thread, the underlying assumption seems to be that not knowing “how” something happens creates a dilemma. The contention that it does not, has not been adequately addressed.
C
cena
Guest
Jesus claimed to forgive sins as well as other things that would have been blasphemous if he wasn’t actually God. He also called himself I AM or YHWHHow exactly does that work? Buddhist follow the Buddha and none of them believe that he was G-D. Taoist follow Lao-Tzu and none of them believe he was God. Socratics follow Socrates but don’t believe he was G-d. A person does not have to be G-d in order to have excellent ideas and moral teachings. Heck many “christians” don’t even really believe that Jesus was God but can still follow his teachings and moral example. This is how we function in life, we see behavior or read about ideas that are attractive to us and that we wish to emulate in our own lives. We see attributes in our parents and role models and teachers etc, that we want to possess ourselves, and then we do the things necessary to acquire those attributes.
A
alchemist3
Guest
John the Baptist also granted a remission of sins, did he not? Did not the priest also exercise the authority to Atone for sins through ritual sacrifice? What was blasphemous was Jesus trying to assert that he had authority, not that no human had the authority to forgive sins. He also never called himself YHWH, that is very different from the “I Am” statement.Jesus claimed to forgive sins as well as other things that would have been blasphemous if he wasn’t actually God. He also called himself I AM or YHWH
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
No, John did not forgive sins and the priests offered sacrifice for the remission of sins but they did not forgive sins themselves. And I am not sure that sins were actually forgiven by these sacrifices. I’m pretty sure this was more like a prayer offered to God as a sign of repentence but it did not, of itself, cause sins to be forgiven.John the Baptist also granted a remission of sins, did he not? Did not the priest also exercise the authority to Atone for sins through ritual sacrifice?
Linus2nd
A
alchemist3
Guest
We need a Jew now. I am fairly certain that the sacrifices were meant to act as granting a forgiveness of sins. Jesus took this authority away from the priest, but it did not necessarily have anything to do with his being God. He could have been exercising the same authority as the priest, acting for God, not as God.No, John did not forgive sins and the priests offered sacrifice for the remission of sins but they did not forgive sins themselves. And I am not sure that sins were actually forgiven by these sacrifices. I’m pretty sure this was more like a prayer offered to God as a sign of repentence but it did not, of itself, cause sins to be forgiven.
Linus2nd
N
NeuralMonk
Guest
Sacrifices were acts of penance. They were the fine for getting caught, but they were not penal. This is why Jesus’s sacrifice (and from that the eucharist which is the perfection of the sacrifice) was sufficient.We need a Jew now. I am fairly certain that the sacrifices were meant to act as granting a forgiveness of sins. Jesus took this authority away from the priest, but it did not necessarily have anything to do with his being God. He could have been exercising the same authority as the priest, acting for God, not as God.
If you know your catechism, you will know the Jewish stance on the sacrifice because Jesus fulfills it.
Reconciliation is about the same. The priest would hear the sin publicly, they would say an act of contrition (read Jesus’s parable of the pharisee and the tax collector), the offering would be given, and the priest would grant absolution of the sin based on “God’s” response on the altar. If the flames consumed the sacrifice, then the offering was acceptable (Cain and Abel should come to mind).
The high priest could intervene if they thought the penitent was not honest to reject the offering and the sins would be retained.
What has changed:
- Mortal sin is no longer penal. Jesus paid for it (Jesus and the woman in adultery).
- The sacrifice is no longer bloody.
- Jesus is our High Priest.
- The right to forgive sins was given to the church because this is His bride.
- The blood is a new species of sacrifice which was Holy to God before, and is now given to us.
We then stand, as a holy priesthood before God, and like the Jewish priest, partake in the sacrifice given one our behalf (the mass), and eat of the flesh of the sacrifice (Jewish meat hook), and now share in God’s portion of the blood of the sacrifice. We are then partakers in the heavenly realm’s in Christ Jesus. Immanuel, God with-in us.
It is quite beautiful you know. :extrahappy:
H
hasantas
Guest
There are 4 sources of Islam 1. Quran 2. Hadiths 3. Sunnah 4. The unity of Muslims=NeuralMonk;12631326]Sorry but you just contradicted yourself. I will paraphrase: 1. We get all truth from Quran which is the only source of true revelation. 2. This truths is from Hadiths. Or does the Quran stated that imam’s have the ability to make up Hadiths which become part of the non-changing Quran. This sounds confusing.
Quran is exactly revelation from God. The property of Hadiths is from revelation but word belong to Prophet Muhammed. God tought Muhammed what is right and wrong and Muhammed told and performed that with His life and that is Sunnah. Muslims experienced that and they approved and that is Unity(Icma).
If Lucifer deveived Muhammed then Lucifer have should deceived all humanbeing. There is nobody as moraly and humanity values as Muhammed. I think you must give up that ridiculous claim because that make you comic.Maybe Lucifer has the ability to deceive. Maybe he deceived Muhammed that he was Gabriel JUST like he deceived Ishta in the garden.
You are wrong. Satan was a Jin and Jins are not angel. There are good and bad Jins. Angel never rebel against God.Lucifer was an angel. Lucifer rebelled against God. Did God give him permission?
If Satan deceive you how would you know? I think you are being deceived.The first deception was too bold, mankind could not become like God. The second deception was more subtle, mankind should not worship like angels. Just a theory mind you for the sake of discussion only.
You have not own the real text even you are drawing away from that!Ancient literature (scholar) perspective… the New Testament.
You are again comic. Most of Sahabas were Hafiz(memorizer of whole Quran). If some would change a letter all Sahabas would object. What that commission did is collecting verses in a book. That is more valid than a book which was about 500 years ago and particularities of which we are not aware of.He was the editor. Editors ALWAYS have the ability to change a work of literature. None of the verses had order, Zayd brought that order as he saw fit. Just like the Catholic church weeded through the scriptures to choose the best, most accurate representation, Zayd choose what is in the Quran. Even if we could authenticate that Muhammad actually spoke these words, it was Zayd who made the Quran.
That is from Quran and Quran is directly from God.You don’t know that because both you and Muhammad are using the Talmud… oh wait, Muhammad would listen to the Talmud and Gospels, and believed what he heard, but you don’t.
I believe that at least 70 percentage of Bible was preserved untill now. I can see the facts in Bible. You can trust a case which is 500 years before Quran but you cannot believe that Quran is being preserved. I think (actually you state, Satan deceive) you do not think Muhammed is prophet and Quran is a holy scripture. That is your choice and exam.Not quite. The gap between Jesus and the earliest manuscript is 40 years. Unless people don’t live for more than 60 years of age, but they do. It is first hand accounts, not only in the gospels, but also in the Roman documents, Jewish document, etc. And that is just the manuscripts, not to mention the writer’s words, passed by scribes.
1 John 1:1
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched.
We have every particularities life of Muhammed as a prophet. But do you have about Jesus?I don’t think Zayd ever looked at, touched or handled Muhammad. John and Peter did of Jesus.
Islam state that Jesus was a prophet and who say so then he has a valid faith. But you make it very difficult to believe in. You can claim only that a Satan may deceived Muhammed but we can show many problems in idea of Jesus being a god. Even you have not valid verses in Bible which prove that Jesus is Son of God. With strained interpretation you try to reason that. Muslims can understand why Christians think in that way. Christians like Jesus very much but Muslims do too perhaps Muslims more much love Jesus and ofcourse all other prophets. But we are depentend on proofs and facts but not on mysteries.
B
Bahman
Guest
The sixth commandment: "Thou shalt not kill. I think I have said enough!There are 4 sources of Islam 1. Quran 2. Hadiths 3. Sunnah 4. The unity of Muslims
Quran is exactly revelation from God. The property of Hadiths is from revelation but word belong to Prophet Muhammed. God tought Muhammed what is right and wrong and Muhammed told and performed that with His life and that is Sunnah. Muslims experienced that and they approved and that is Unity(Icma).
If Lucifer deveived Muhammed then Lucifer have should deceived all humanbeing. There is nobody as moraly and humanity values as Muhammed. I think you must give up that ridiculous claim because that make you comic.
You are wrong. Satan was a Jin and Jins are not angel. There are good and bad Jins. Angel never rebel against God.
If Satan deceive you how would you know? I think you are being deceived.
You have not own the real text even you are drawing away from that!
You are again comic. Most of Sahabas were Hafiz(memorizer of whole Quran). If some would change a letter all Sahabas would object. What that commission did is collecting verses in a book. That is more valid than a book which was about 500 years ago and particularities of which we are not aware of.
That is from Quran and Quran is directly from God.
I believe that at least 70 percentage of Bible was preserved untill now. I can see the facts in Bible. You can trust a case which is 500 years before Quran but you cannot believe that Quran is being preserved. I think (actually you state, Satan deceive) you do not think Muhammed is prophet and Quran is a holy scripture. That is your choice and exam.
1 John 1:1
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched.
We have every particularities life of Muhammed as a prophet. But do you have about Jesus?
Islam state that Jesus was a prophet and who say so then he has a valid faith. But you make it very difficult to believe in. You can claim only that a Satan may deceived Muhammed but we can show many problems in idea of Jesus being a god. Even you have not valid verses in Bible which prove that Jesus is Son of God. With strained interpretation you try to reason that. Muslims can understand why Christians think in that way. Christians like Jesus very much but Muslims do too perhaps Muslims more much love Jesus and ofcourse all other prophets. But we are depentend on proofs and facts but not on mysteries.
T
tonyrey
Guest
In that case you believe the First Digit is also fixed. Correct?Free will is an illusion if the last digit in the design is fixed. How you could be disagree?
B
Bahman
Guest
We observe the few first digits which is constrained by laws of nature.In that case you believe the First Digit is also fixed. Correct?
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
If God “designed” everything, in other words basically wrote the whole of human history and we are only actors on the stage of life, then we have no free will.
Howver, if God created everything and knows everything including everything that everyone will ever do, then we have free will.
How God can “know” everything and yet we not be "puppets on a string, even God’s string, may be beyond our human ability to understand but just because something is beyond our ability to understand does not mean that it is not true.
One of the things about arrogance is that it affects both believers and non-believers.
Howver, if God created everything and knows everything including everything that everyone will ever do, then we have free will.
How God can “know” everything and yet we not be "puppets on a string, even God’s string, may be beyond our human ability to understand but just because something is beyond our ability to understand does not mean that it is not true.
One of the things about arrogance is that it affects both believers and non-believers.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Is The Creator included?We observe the few first digits which is constrained by laws of nature.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Knowledge doesn’t necessarily entail causation, Tom.If God “designed” everything, in other words basically wrote the whole of human history and we are only actors on the stage of life, then we have no free will.
Howver, if God created everything and knows everything including everything that everyone will ever do, then we have free will.
How God can “know” everything and yet we not be "puppets on a string, even God’s string, may be beyond our human ability to understand but just because something is beyond our ability to understand does not mean that it is not true.
One of the things about arrogance is that it affects both believers and non-believers.
B
Bahman
Guest
The problem is whether we are included!?Is The Creator included?
H
hasantas
Guest
Did Moses kill anyone?The sixth commandment: "Thou shalt not kill. I think I have said enough!
B
Bahman
Guest
No, but Muhammad did! How God could change his moral laws?Did Moses kill anyone?
H
hasantas
Guest
And also do you know that David, Abraham had wars. Didn’t David kill some(Goliath). Wasn’t David ancestor of Jesus?The sixth commandment: "Thou shalt not kill. I think I have said enough!
B
Bahman
Guest
That is your problem who believe in such a God, not mine! So we are getting close to the fact that Satan had his hand on head of some of prophets!And also do you know that David, Abraham had wars. Didn’t David kill some(Goliath). Wasn’t David ancestor of Jesus?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.