Originally posted by lord xyzThank you for proving that you know nothing about flood anthropology.
What? That there was a flood in the middle east, that flooded a town at most? Oh, guess I do know that. I'm talking about the Bible saying it was a world flood.If you count correctly, that adds up to 13. Minus Joseph is 12. Also, I'd like to take this oppurtunity and mention "At this point, God remembered". It seems God has memory problems.
Again with the English translation attacks? That's lame.
Exactly my point. Joseph was sold by 11 of his brothers. Benjamin was not involved. I actually don't think he was even born at that point. So that analogy fails.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
There's no way to prove they come from the same source, but they both claim to: the god that revealed his existance to Abraham."Overwhelimg proof" 😂 pendejo.....
-Jesus was born of a virgin birth.
-Jesus performed miracles.
-Adam was the first human.
-The events of Moses' and Noah's life as depicted in Genesis and Exodus happened.
-Satan enjoyed a privilaged spot in Heaven before he screwed up and was cast into Hell.
And the list goes on and on......
Again, had you simply read the Koran, you would know all this.
Because the Bible you read is in English. If it was in Arabic, it would say "allah".
It can, depending on the context. If two people are speaking Arabic, and are Christian, and are talking about the god of the Bible, "allah" is what will be said.
You don't know anything about logic and reason.
That's actually untrue. The book never once claims "Verily, this is the book of a moon god!" Nope, sorry, doesn't happen. It does however claim to be the book of the god of Adam, Noah, Moses, Abraham, Jesus and the Apostles.
If you're going to pull psuedo connections out of your ass, then somebody could easily argue that Jesus is the Sun God based on all his impeccable similarities to Horus, Mithra, and so on.
I'm Christian, but I'm open to the possibility of being wrong. I've read the Koran (something you should do before voicing your opinion about the religion) and it flows more logically and has a pretty good argument.
Um...you're not one to be talking about not fullfilling challenges, since you dodge them like a fat person dodges salad bars, ese.
My answer to your "challenge" is that the Koran claims that the Bible had been corrupted throughout the centuries by men adding what they think should be. There's really no way to disprove either point of view. Also, again, you would've had your answer if you simply read the Koran.
The three religions are related.
Yes it does. You're not stupid, but you're brainwashed and very pig-headed.
Quiero Mota, you have side-stepped one the most powerful parts of my post (I am tempted to wonder why). Here it is again:
“The crucifixion of Jesus Christ is a very major fact recorded in the Bible. The entire axis and central message of the Bible is summed up in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There is absolutely no way that the Bible and Qu’ran could possibly be from the same Source and disagree on something as fundamental, vital, and critical as this.”
You completely avoided addressing this statement Quiero Mota, but it is the hallmark of, and that which, separates Christianity from all others. The crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is unparalleled in history, paramount to the message and vitality of the gospel, and the foundation whereupon the faith of the apostles, early church, and believers down through the ages rest their faith. For if Jesus Christ was not crucified, buried in a tomb, and resurrected on the third day as He affirmed, then no one is saved from their sins not even you. In other words, if the Bible and the Qu’ran disagree on this one fact, then they are not from the same Source (it is as simple as that).
What more can I say? There really isn't anything left for me to say. I have met you where the rubber meets the road, and summed this entire correspondence with this one small post.
I rest my case.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Quiero Mota, you have side-stepped one the most powerful parts of my post (I am tempted to wonder why). Here it is again:“The crucifixion of Jesus Christ is a very [b]major fact
recorded in the Bible. The entire axis and central message of the Bible is summed up in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There is absolutely no way that the Bible and Qu’ran could possibly be from the same Source and disagree on something as fundamental, vital, and critical as this.”You completely avoided addressing this statement Quiero Mota, but it is the hallmark of, and that which, separates Christianity from all others. The crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is unparalleled in history, paramount to the message and vitality of the gospel, and the foundation whereupon the faith of the apostles, early church, and believers down through the ages rest their faith. For if Jesus Christ was not crucified, buried in a tomb, and resurrected on the third day as He affirmed, then no one is saved from their sins not even you. In other words, if the Bible and the Qu’ran disagree on this one fact, then they are not from the same Source (it is as simple as that).
What more can I say? There really isn't anything left for me to say. I have met you where the rubber meets the road, and summed this entire correspondence with this one small post.
I rest my case. [/B]
OH SNAP !
GO GET EM GIRLFREIND !
Oh btw, JIA, I'm straight now. Jesus, our Lord and Savior, has saved my soul from my disgusting little sins.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Quiero Mota, you have side-stepped one the most powerful parts of my post (I am tempted to wonder why). Here it is again:“The crucifixion of Jesus Christ is a very [b]major fact
recorded in the Bible. The entire axis and central message of the Bible is summed up in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There is absolutely no way that the Bible and Qu’ran could possibly be from the same Source and disagree on something as fundamental, vital, and critical as this.”You completely avoided addressing this statement Quiero Mota, but it is the hallmark of, and that which, separates Christianity from all others. The crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is unparalleled in history, paramount to the message and vitality of the gospel, and the foundation whereupon the faith of the apostles, early church, and believers down through the ages rest their faith. For if Jesus Christ was not crucified, buried in a tomb, and resurrected on the third day as He affirmed, then no one is saved from their sins not even you. In other words, if the Bible and the Qu’ran disagree on this one fact, then they are not from the same Source (it is as simple as that).
What more can I say? There really isn't anything left for me to say. I have met you where the rubber meets the road, and summed this entire correspondence with this one small post.
I rest my case. [/B]
Ijole guey! 🤨 Look who's talking about side-stepping.
You quoted my massive post (where I basically tore you a new one) and then posted something completely unrelated.
I did address it. Yes, that's the main difference between the two books, I know, eveyone and their mom knows. Did you even read the list where I pointed out the striking similarites?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Quiero Mota, you have side-stepped one the most powerful parts of my post (I am tempted to wonder why). Here it is again:“The crucifixion of Jesus Christ is a very [b]major fact
recorded in the Bible. The entire axis and central message of the Bible is summed up in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There is absolutely no way that the Bible and Qu’ran could possibly be from the same Source and disagree on something as fundamental, vital, and critical as this.”You completely avoided addressing this statement Quiero Mota, but it is the hallmark of, and that which, separates Christianity from all others. The crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is unparalleled in history, paramount to the message and vitality of the gospel, and the foundation whereupon the faith of the apostles, early church, and believers down through the ages rest their faith. For if Jesus Christ was not crucified, buried in a tomb, and resurrected on the third day as He affirmed, then no one is saved from their sins not even you. In other words, if the Bible and the Qu’ran disagree on this one fact, then they are not from the same Source (it is as simple as that).
What more can I say? There really isn't anything left for me to say. I have met you where the rubber meets the road, and summed this entire correspondence with this one small post.
I rest my case. [/B]
simple. in the red letter bible{exclusing selective and manipulated translations} jesus never claimed to be the son of god. neither did he claim that the crucifiction was a way of redemption.
its odd that the only major paradox u can repeat is based completely and utterly on personal faith not hinted upon by the creator of the relegion himself. as for the physical events, islam has more than taken into account and given its version of the crucifixion.
there goes your "case"
Originally posted by leonheartmmYes He did.
simple. in the red letter bible{exclusing selective and manipulated translations} jesus never claimed to be the son of god. neither did he claim that the crucifiction was a way of redemption.its odd that the only major paradox u can repeat is based completely and utterly on personal faith not hinted upon by the creator of the relegion himself. as for the physical events, islam has more than taken into account and given its version of the crucifixion.
there goes your "case"
Matthew 10:38
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
Matthew 16:24
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Mark 8:34
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Mark 10:21
Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
Luke 9:23
And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
Luke 14:27
And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Yah, so you are wrong. It's clear as night and day really. Following the cross, ie. dying with Jesus as is so often mentioned in the Bible and then being born again in Jesus (ie. again following Him) is the only way to be worthy and saved.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
simple. in the red letter bible{exclusing selective and manipulated translations} jesus never claimed to be the son of god. neither did he claim that the crucifiction was a way of redemption.its odd that the only major paradox u can repeat is based completely and utterly on personal faith not hinted upon by the creator of the relegion himself. as for the physical events, islam has more than taken into account and given its version of the crucifixion.
there goes your "case"
Leonheartmm, when the high priest asked Jesus point blank if He was the Son of the Blessed, both he and Jesus understood what that meant. Son of the Blessed means Son of God. So when the high priest asked Jesus this question, he was hoping that Jesus would admit to being the Son of God so that he could charge Him with blasphemy then ultimately petition the Roman Governor to order Jesus' execution. You see, blasphemy apparently was a capital crime under the Mosaic Law that the Jews lived under. However, the Jews were under Roman rule at that time and did not have any authority to issue anyone a death sentence.
So, what did Jesus say in response to the high priests question? Did Jesus hem and haw around the question? Maybe Jesus remained silent as He had done up to that point. Perhaps Jesus started to talk fast to try and get out of that predicament.
Well, let's see what Jesus said,
Mark 14:60-62
60 And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” 61 But He kept silent and answered nothing.
Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” 62 Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”
shock
I'm speechless.
Jesus just admitted to being the Son of the Blessed (i.e. the Son of God).
Matthew 26:62-68
62 And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” 63 But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!” 64 Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” 65 Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy! 66 What do you think?”
They answered and said, “He is deserving of death.”
67 Then they spat in His face and beat Him; and others struck Him with the palms of their hands, 68 saying, “Prophesy to us, Christ! Who is the one who struck You?”
Jesus remained silent about the accusations and lies that were being brought against Him by the false witnesses (in other words the trivial, non-issues).
But when it came down to brass tacks, when it came down to the nitty gritty, where the rubber meets the road--Jesus opened His mouth fearlessly and boldly proclaimed in the hearing of the high priests and everyone else who was present that He was/is the Son of God. At that precise moment the high priest flew into a rage, tore his clothes, and charged Jesus with blasphemy.
The Qu'ran denies that Jesus died by crucifixion.
Sura 4:156
"And for their saying, 'Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, an Apostle of God.' Yet they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but they had only his likeness. And they who differed about him were in doubt concerning him: No sure knowledge had they about him, but followed only an opinion, and they did not really slay him, but God took him up to Himself. And God is Mighty, Wise!"
Now, here is what the Bible states about the crucifixion of Jesus the Christ:
Acts 4:10
10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.
John 19:33-34
33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.
The Qu'ran's version of Jesus' crucifixion does not accord with the Bible.
Originally posted by Quark_666
To get back to the question...Descartes was a smart man, and he wasn't even sure he existed for half of his life.
I don't think you can possibly know whether you see the world accurately. Beyond existence, absolutes are pointless, whether accurate or not.
Descartes didn't even know if he existed for half his life yet you claim he was a smart man?
Wow.
shock
Originally posted by Nellinator
Yes He did.Matthew 10:38
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.Matthew 16:24
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.Mark 8:34
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.Mark 10:21
Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.Luke 9:23
And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.Luke 14:27
And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.Yah, so you are wrong. It's clear as night and day really. Following the cross, ie. dying with Jesus as is so often mentioned in the Bible and then being born again in Jesus (ie. again following Him) is the only way to be worthy and saved.
crucification=death on the cross
carrying the cross was a common term used to symbolise carrying one's burdens and responsibilities in life{as a prisoner in life wud carry his. crosses were not used just for execution}. theres is ambiguous evidence of jesus actually dying on the cross{sign on jonah etc.} or dying at all. but obviously you misunderstand what i was saying. both the quran and bible are sure of the fact that SUM1 was on the cross, the muslims just dont believe it was jesus but a lookalike who god had temporarily made to look that way.in islamic tradition, jesus had to do everything {carrying the cross etc} until teh actual TIME of his execution, at which time another person replaced jesus.
so those references wud make perfect sense as yeshua "took up his cross" and was tortured etc. but see as jesus never mentioned CRUCIFICATION at all. and the myth of jonah is against the fact that jesus was dead in the hub of the earth. i was referring to the fact that the only real thing which is different isnt even there int the red letters{i.e. jesus's death, or lack thereof} but is based on faith alone. the POINT being made was that the two relegions, scripturally are not nearly as different as jia claims at their basis.
also the jump of logic thatu take from bearing one's burdens{which wud actually imply ACCEPTING YOUR SINS AND WRONGDOINGs as personal baggage and not simply having them vanish because of crucifixion} to being born again symbolically as jesus died and was resurrected in mindboggling. plus the thing under question here is whether the scriptueres support jesus's own divinity and the christian explanation and implication of his sacrifice.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Leonheartmm, when the high priest asked Jesus point blank if He was the Son of the Blessed, both he and Jesus understood what that meant. Son of the Blessed means [b]Son of God. So when the high priest asked Jesus this question, he was hoping that Jesus would admit to being the Son of God so that he could charge Him with blasphemy then ultimately petition the Roman Governor to order Jesus' execution. You see, blasphemy apparently was a capital crime under the Mosaic Law that the Jews lived under. However, the Jews were under Roman rule at that time and did not have any authority to issue anyone a death sentence.So, what did Jesus say in response to the high priests question? Did Jesus hem and haw around the question? Maybe Jesus remained silent as He had done up to that point. Perhaps Jesus started to talk fast to try and get out of that predicament.
Well, let's see what Jesus said,
Mark 14:60-62
60 And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” 61 But He kept silent and answered nothing.
Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” 62 Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”shock
I'm speechless.
Jesus just admitted to being the Son of the Blessed (i.e. the Son of God).
Matthew 26:62-68
62 And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” 63 But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!” 64 Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” 65 Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy! 66 What do you think?”
They answered and said, “He is deserving of death.”
67 Then they spat in His face and beat Him; and others struck Him with the palms of their hands, 68 saying, “Prophesy to us, Christ! Who is the one who struck You?”Jesus remained silent about the accusations and lies that were being brought against Him by the false witnesses (in other words the trivial, non-issues).
But when it came down to brass tacks, when it came down to the nitty gritty, where the rubber meets the road--Jesus opened His mouth fearlessly and boldly proclaimed in the hearing of the high priests and everyone else who was present that He was/is the Son of God. At that precise moment the high priest flew into a rage, tore his clothes, and charged Jesus with blasphemy.
The Qu'ran denies that Jesus died by crucifixion.
Sura 4:156
"And for their saying, 'Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, an Apostle of God.' Yet they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but they had only his likeness. And they who differed about him were in doubt concerning him: No sure knowledge had they about him, but followed only an opinion, and they did not really slay him, but God took him up to Himself. And God is Mighty, Wise!"Now, here is what the Bible states about the crucifixion of Jesus the Christ:
Acts 4:10
10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.John 19:33-34
33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.The Qu'ran's version of Jesus' crucifixion does not accord with the Bible. [/B]
tut tut tut tut tut. bad translations dont equal evidence. r u sure the original bible used the word for BIOLOGICAL SON???? wasnt it more the "messiah", a messenger, chosen, anoinyted, follower???? many a times when jesus says SON, in english, it really was the phrase used as u wud say, "we are all children of god". or we are all his sons and daughters. besides, the sign of jonah that jesus mentioned denies that. as do a lot of ambiguous testimony of what is supposedly jesus resurrected. i agree it doesnt support islam and does point towards jesus dying at times{remember that this isnt red letter}, but on equally others they make him out to be a human desperately trying to tell people he isnt a ghost.
really, do not put so much faith into bible thumpers who would invent verses which claim of trinity{when they were never there} and reinterpret things like pots and pans to ANOINTER{suppose to refer to jesus as beleived by ythe general christian public} simply because the act of rubbing is involved.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Descartes didn't even know if he existed for half his life yet you claim he was a smart man?Wow.
shock
he did more for the advacement of maths than you {or any1 for that matter} can hope to achieve. he is among the most influential men in history {and influence doesnt mean just remembrance and accepting of philosophy. it means how much the world changed with your idea and how much thought and the life of geenral people and science eveolved from your work} easily above people like muhammad, jesus and buddha, and perhaps second only to the person who invented the wheel.
and jesus thought he was heaven sent, beleiving in a god, angels, heavens etc and suffered for the later part of his life until being crucified and dying. yet u dont see me holding that against his reputation do u?
Originally posted by leonheartmm
simple. in the red letter bible{exclusing selective and manipulated translations} jesus never claimed to be the son of god. neither did he claim that the crucifiction was a way of redemption.its odd that the only major paradox u can repeat is based completely and utterly on personal faith not hinted upon by the creator of the relegion himself. as for the physical events, islam has more than taken into account and given its version of the crucifixion.
there goes your "case"
simple. in the red letter bible{exclusing selective and manipulated translations} jesus never claimed to be the son of god. neither did he claim that the crucifiction was a way of redemption.
John 12:32-34
32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.” 33 This He said, signifying by what death He would die. 34 The people answered Him, “We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever; and how can You say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this Son of Man?”
Jesus said that through being lifted up (i.e. through crucifixion) He would draw people to Himself. Jesus did not necessarily choose His method of death, but since He already knew in advance how He would give His life for the world’s sins, He embraced it. As painful as His sacrifice was Jesus was determined to fulfill His Father’s will.
Matthew 20:18-20
18 “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death, 19 and deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock and to scourge and to crucify. And the third day He will rise again.”
Again, Jesus knew that He would die by crucifixion so He informed His disciples.
its odd that the only major paradox u can repeat is based completely and utterly on personal faith not hinted upon by the creator of the relegion himself. as for the physical events, islam has more than taken into account and given its version of the crucifixion.
there goes your "case"
Jesus Christ was crucified approximately 2,000 years ago whether I or anyone else believes this or not. So I do not believe that Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection is based on personal faith. However, I get the benefit of what Jesus has accomplished on the basis of my personal faith in Him, but my faith does not validate what Jesus has done. Jesus' sacrifice would still be true if no one believed it.
The Qu'ran denies that Jesus died by crucifixion.
Sura 4:156
"And for their saying, 'Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, an Apostle of God.' Yet they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but they had only his likeness. And they who differed about him were in doubt concerning him: No sure knowledge had they about him, but followed only an opinion, and they did not really slay him, but God took him up to Himself. And God is Mighty, Wise!"
Now, here is what the Bible states about the crucifixion of Jesus the Christ:
Acts 4:10
10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.
John 19:33-34
33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.
The Qu'ran's version of Jesus' crucifixion does not agree with the Bible.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
he did more for the advacement of maths than you {or any1 for that matter} can hope to achieve. he is among the most influential men in history {and influence doesnt mean just remembrance and accepting of philosophy. it means how much the world changed with your idea and how much thought and the life of geenral people and science eveolved from your work} easily above people like muhammad, jesus and buddha, and perhaps second only to the person who invented the wheel.and jesus thought he was heaven sent, beleiving in a god, angels, heavens etc and suffered for the later part of his life until being crucified and dying. yet u dont see me holding that against his reputation do u?
Jesus only created the universe and all the laws that govern (including mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
simple. in the red letter bible{exclusing selective and manipulated translations} jesus never claimed to be the son of god. neither did he claim that the crucifiction was a way of redemption.[B]John 12:32-34
32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.” 33 This He said, signifying by what death He would die. 34 The people answered Him, “We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever; and how can You say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this Son of Man?”Jesus said that through being lifted up (i.e. through crucifixion) He would draw people to Himself. Jesus did not necessarily choose His method of death, but since He already knew in advance how He would give His life for the world’s sins, He embraced it. As painful as His sacrifice was Jesus was determined to fulfill His Father’s will.
Matthew 20:18-20
18 “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death, 19 and deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock and to scourge and to crucify. And the third day He will rise again.”Again, Jesus knew that He would die by crucifixion so He informed His disciples.
its odd that the only major paradox u can repeat is based completely and utterly on personal faith not hinted upon by the creator of the relegion himself. as for the physical events, islam has more than taken into account and given its version of the crucifixion.
there goes your "case"
Jesus Christ was crucified approximately 2,000 years ago whether I or anyone else believes this or not. So I do not believe that Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection is based on personal faith. However, I get the benefit of what Jesus has accomplished on the basis of my personal faith in Him, but my faith does not validate what Jesus has done. Jesus' sacrifice would still be true if no one believed it.
The Qu'ran denies that Jesus died by crucifixion.
Sura 4:156
"And for their saying, 'Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, an Apostle of God.' Yet they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but they had only his likeness. And they who differed about him were in doubt concerning him: No sure knowledge had they about him, but followed only an opinion, and they did not really slay him, but God took him up to Himself. And God is Mighty, Wise!"Now, here is what the Bible states about the crucifixion of Jesus the Christ:
Acts 4:10
10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.John 19:33-34
33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.The Qu'ran's version of Jesus' crucifixion does not agree with the Bible. [/B]
awwwww, your really trying now arent you. lets look back at what JESUS said
And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.
now, what do muslims think about crucifixion?????? jesus was RAISED TO THE HEAVENS WHILE THE romans cud not discern that he was replaced by another man of similar looks. forgetting what the NON RED LETTER BIBLE SAYS, {it is the author who creates the connection between death and rising. the author who isnt jesus and seams to be speaking FOR him}. now lets see what muslims think about where he was taken.
but God took him up to Himself.
hmm, now THIS makes sense doesnt it?
will draw all peoples to Myself.
seeing as the muslims beleive that every prophet in their time was for that particular period and civilisation, the WAY TOWARDS GOD.
srry, islam is as credible here if not more than christianity. think up of some REAL contradcitions between the red letter bible and islam please.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Jesus only created the universe and all the laws that govern (including mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc).
and conveniently forgot to tell his followers abotu such useful things. too bad.
that is your self contradicting faith{trinity} speaking and has ZERO evidence to back it up and lots of evidence to deny it. on the other hand the whole world accepts the advancement of descartes/pythagoras etc based on historical evidence and the verifyable positive results which are gotten form the laws they discovered.