No absolutes?

Started by Quiero Mota18 pages
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
If the Bible and the Qu'ran were from the same Source then there would be harmony and agreement between them. [b]But there is not.[/B]. [/B]

You're wrong; there is harmony between the books. In fact they agree on many things. Over 50% in fact.*

The 3 blaring disagreements are 1) Jesus was a human and he wasn't crucified. 2) The Garden of Eden was in Heaven, not here on earth. And 3) Satan is not an angel, he's a djinn.*

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
No, it does not. YHWH does not mean Allah. Your premise is that Allah means god in Arabic so then it must refer to the God of the Bible. However, "God" is not the Father's Name, it is in a sense Who He is relative to humanity. But the Father's Name is YHWH--not Allah. Futhermore, God's Name (YHWH) does not mean "God," so your premise that YHWH and Allah are one and the same because Allah means god in Arabic is unsupportable, untenable, and false--not to mention untrue.
[/COLOR]

Stop being ignorant, ese. Arabic speaking Christians call him allah, Arabic speaking Jews call him allah, and Arabic speaking Muslims call him allah. And also, Zeus would be an allah.

Why is all that? Because in that language "allah" means deity.*

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You must deal with the contradictions before you can logically conclude that the God of the Bible, YHWH (Who has never been associated with an idol) and the moon, idol god of the Qu'ran (Allah) are one and the same. This and other glaring inconsistencies and discrepancies cannot be whimsically swept under the rug (if you know what I mean) they must be addressed once and for all or your argument is invalid.

The god of the Koran is not connected with any idol. In fact, there probably is no religion that condems idol worship more that Islam.*

And wipe that "mood god" bullshit out of your mind. It's just not true.*

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive

"I just don't like the idea of it, so I ignore the fact."

[COLOR=darkblue]I truly desire to understand your point of view.
.[/COLOR]

What do you mean? What point of veiw?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Christianity is not an Abrahamic religion, it is the name given to represent the teachings and Word of Jesus Christ and those believers who have called upon the Name of Jesus for salvation from their sins.

Wrong, the Abrahamic religions are a family of religions that include Christianity and Islam.*

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Quiero Mota--sir--show me [B]one reference in the Bible to Mecca, Mohammed, Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims, Islam, seven heavens, the teaching that Christians and Jews must be exterminated for refusing to convert to Islam, that Jesus was not crucified, that God is not Father, Son, Holy Spirit (and many other references from the Qu'ran that contradict the Bible)--and I will admit that I was wrong.

Just one. [/B]

There is none. I never said there was. That was a huge stray from the topic.

Islam didn't exist until 600 A.D. pendejo.

--------

*All that tells me you don't know a damn thing about Islam other than what your biased and uninformed preacher has told you. You've also never opened a Koran once in your life. All you know about that book are the few verses you've read on the internet, likely in links from bigoted Christian websites. You really can't go about making assertions about a religion when you know next to nothing about it.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[b]Daniel 7:13
I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him.

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Proverbs 30:4
Who has ascended into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son’s name, If you know?

As you can clearly see there are a number of references to Jesus in the Old Testament (during His pre-incarnation before He took upon Himself "flesh" and dwelled among us). [/B]

ahan, and WHERE does it say that hes yeshua/jesus? all i see is son/son/son and son of MAN. and the second one is misintrpreted. oddly enough most of those things hold untrue for jesus and true for muhammad.

Nellinator's rebuttals are interesting (JIA's aren't) but it goes back to the same confirmation bias I spoke of before. Between Alliance and myself, we pointed out dozens and dozens of problems with the historicity and/or validity of the Gospels and Bible (among countless others that we lissed), and each was carefully side-swiped by some rationalization. You'll see whatever you want to if you want to retain your faith, not what's really there.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Nellinator's rebuttals are interesting (JIA's aren't) but it goes back to the same confirmation bias I spoke of before. Between Alliance and myself, we pointed out dozens and dozens of problems with the historicity and/or validity of the Gospels and Bible (among countless others that we lissed), and each was carefully side-swiped by some rationalization. You'll see whatever you want to if you want to retain your faith, not what's really there.
It works like this, rather than think your claim is a lie, lie about other things to better fit your claim. It's like that whole Creationist Grand Canyon argument. They don't admit the Grand Canyon doesn't fit into the Bible, so they make it fit, by lying about the Canyon. Eventually they'll get to a point that even they don't believe what they're saying.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
ahan, and WHERE does it say that hes yeshua/jesus? all i see is son/son/son and son of MAN. and the second one is misintrpreted. oddly enough most of those things hold untrue for jesus and true for muhammad.

The term Son is a reference to Jesus Christ before His incarnation. Jesus has always been the Son of God. However, the Name Jesus is not found in the Old Testament for one good reason: Jesus is the earthly, human Name given to Jesus before He was born a Man. Prior to this event Jesus was incarnate (i.e. not possessing a flesh, blood, and bone body).

Jesus was always the Son of God before becoming flesh but He was not called Jesus then. Jesus' Name at that time was synonymous with His Father's Name (i.e. YHWH), not Jesus. In other words, Jesus was not called Jesus back then He shared the same Name as His Father. Also Jesus was referred to as the Word or I AM prior to being born of the virgin.

Do you follow me leonheartmm?

Jesus = The Sun god.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Jesus = The Sun god.
Here's some more proof:

Daniel 7:13
I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him.

It was night. Then he saw the sun rise with the clouds following it.

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

The sun is everlasting (to the ancients), and it is the father of light.

Proverbs 30:4
Who has ascended into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son’s name, If you know?

The sun ascends and decends throught the year, between the solstices. The sun is what moves the winds and the waters. The sun also lets us see [establishes] the ends of the world.

Can't wait for JIA to post more Jesus stuff. So many coincidences.

Also, Isiah 9:6 is talking about Joseph. I'm glad he said that actually.

Joseph -- miracle birth, 12 brothers, betrayed by brother Judah, sold for 20 pieces of silver by Judah, helped his brothers along with others etc.
Jesus -- miracle birth, 12 disciples, betrayed by disciple Judas, sold for 30 pieces of silver by Judas, helped his disciples along with others etc.

It's seems like the Jesus story is a recycled version of the Joseph story, don't you think?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
You're wrong; there is harmony between the books. In fact they agree on many things. Over 50% in fact.*

The 3 blaring disagreements are 1) Jesus was a human and he wasn't crucified. 2) The Garden of Eden was in Heaven, not here on earth. And 3) Satan is not an angel, he's a djinn.*

Stop being ignorant, ese. Arabic speaking Christians call him allah, Arabic speaking Jews call him allah, and Arabic speaking Muslims call him allah. And also, Zeus would be an allah.

Why is all that? Because in that language "allah" means deity.*

The god of the Koran is not connected with any idol. In fact, there probably is no religion that condems idol worship more that Islam.*

And wipe that "mood god" bullshit out of your mind. It's just not true.*

What do you mean? What point of veiw?

Wrong, the Abrahamic religions are a family of religions that include Christianity and Islam.*

There is none. I never said there was. That was a huge stray from the topic.

Islam didn't exist until 600 A.D. pendejo.

--------

*All that tells me you don't know a damn thing about Islam other than what your biased and uninformed preacher has told you. You've also never opened a Koran once in your life. All you know about that book are the few verses you've read on the internet, likely in links from bigoted Christian websites. You really can't go about making assertions about a religion when you know next to nothing about it.

You're wrong; there is harmony between the books. In fact they agree on many things. Over 50% in fact.*

The 3 blaring disagreements are 1) Jesus was a human and he wasn't crucified. 2) The Garden of Eden was in Heaven, not here on earth. And 3) Satan is not an angel, he's a djinn.*

Those are not the only glaring contradictions. However, just one contradiction is one contradiction too many. Besides, the first discrepancy that you list is a major one. That one alone ought to be evidence enough for you that the Bible and the Qu’ran are not from the same Source. The entire gospel is founded on the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The very fact that the Qu’ran blatantly denies the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ is overwhelming proof that it is not from the same Source. The apostle Paul (who wrote two-thirds of the New Testament) said it best:

1 Corinthians 15:12-23
12 Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep [died] in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable. 20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

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. I will reaffirm my previous stance:

There is no harmony between the Bible and the Qu’ran. The only pseudo similarities exist because the Qu’ran contains terms that were derived from the Bible (makes perfect sense to me). Interestingly enough the same is not true in the converse (i.e. the other way around). Case in point the Bible never cites any terms identified with or associated with Islam. Terms like Sh’ite, Sunni, Mohammed, Allah, or Mecca are conspicuously absent in the Bible and yet you untenably claim that there is harmony between the two books? You indefensibly claim that they agree on many things. Care to mention a few of these many things? If there are many you should be able to produce just a few, right? You could even go all out and provide several examples if you want to blow me away.

Stop being ignorant, ese. Arabic speaking Christians call him allah, Arabic speaking Jews call him allah, and Arabic speaking Muslims call him allah. And also, Zeus would be an allah.

Why is all that? Because in that language "allah" means deity.*

I couldn’t care less what Arabic-speaking Christians, Jews, and Muslims call their god. The God of the Bible is never referred to as Allah—not even once. His Name is YHWH not Allah—there is no way to mix this up with semantics or linguistics. Just as your name on this forum is Quiero Mota and my name is JesusIsAlive, regardless of what language these two names are translated into they are not referring to the same person. Allah does not mean YHWH and YHWH does not mean god so your argument once again is exploded based on your logic and reasoning.

The god of the Koran is not connected with any idol. In fact, there probably is no religion that condems idol worship more that Islam.*

And wipe that "mood god" bullshit out of your mind. It's just not true.*

The god of the Qu’ran is the moon god that is why there is a crescent symbol associated with him.

Face it, Allah is an idol. I am not wiping anything from my mind that is true and historically sustainable (do your research if you doubt my words and find out all you can about the origin of Allah).

What do you mean? What point of veiw?

The view that you hold about the Bible and the Qu’ran.

Wrong, the Abrahamic religions are a family of religions that include Christianity and Islam.*

No, there is not such thing as the “Abrahamic religion.” There is no such animal as a family of religions in reference to Christianity. I have heard of Judaism and Islam but neither one is the same in terms of doctrine, beliefs, practices, etc.

There is none. I never said there was. That was a huge stray from the topic.

Islam didn't exist until 600 A.D. pendejo.

I asked you to provide those references to illustrate the fact that in order for the Bible and the Qu’ran to be from the same Source there must of necessity be some degree of agreement in terms of tenor, doctrine, beliefs, theme, and practices. But as you can readily see you were unable to fulfill my simple challenge. In short, you were not able to show a link between the Bible and the Qu’ran by simply providing one term from the list that I submitted to you as being in the Bible. Again, here was my original challenge:

"Quiero Mota--sir--show me one reference in the Bible to Mecca, Mohammed, Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims, Islam, seven heavens, the teaching that Christians and Jews must be exterminated for refusing to convert to Islam, that Jesus was not crucified, that God is not Father, Son, Holy Spirit (and many other references from the Qu'ran that contradict the Bible)--and I will admit that I was wrong.

Just one."

If you had been able to satisfy this one request Quiero Mota you would have strengthened your argument and thus shown a link between the Bible and the Qu’ran. But unfortunately (for you) this is not the case.

However, just one contradiction is one contradiction too many.

There are at lest 388 contradictions in the bible.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
No, there is not such thing as the “Abrahamic religion.” There is no such animal as a family of religions in reference to Christianity. I have heard of Judaism and Islam but neither one is the same in terms of doctrine, beliefs, practices, etc.

That trio has been grouped together for a very long time. Why? They are all monotheistic, they more or less share the same prophets and all trace their origin back to the prophet Abraham. If your mind didn't live in a void, you'd know that this terminology is standard.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Breakout of Christianity again in Judea and in Rome mentioned by Tacitus.

Damn women and slaves.

Originally posted by Nellinator
By using the Gospels I was referring to how they validated worshiping Christ to themselves. The connections with prophecy and whatnot happened very early and Jesus apparently cited himself as fulfilling them. Also, the errors and edits made are easily detectable because of the multiplicity of documents. There are too many copies and they were separated for long periods. There is a strong consensus as to the original composition.
But at the major transition points (the first drafts and translations) where errors were made. Prime example "Sea of Reeds" to "Red Sea." There's also something about one of the Mary magdalene and one of the words used to describe here was mistranslated. Becuasue of the multiplicty of the documents we do know of errors, but with a subject as polarizing as Christianity was at the time and given that this was a movement from the (often rather psychotic) members of the poor lower classes, I find it safer to be skeptical. There are many things that easily could have happened in the time. Its just the constant seperating out the truth from the reast of the bullsh*t that is such a problem in ancient history.

Originally posted by Nellinator
One thing you got to consider in that case though is the timing. Tertuallian was 200AD so Christianity was on the outs with the Roman Empire. It is unlikely that Tertullian would have access to that document as a result. I think you'd have to look for citations of Tacitus after Constantine legalized Christianity. Sadly, that just opens up the "they could have tampered" argument again though.

If I remember correctly, he wasn't cited until well after...four or five centuries.

Originally posted by Alliance
That trio has been grouped together for a very long time. Why? They are all monotheistic, they more or less share the same prophets and all trace their origin back to the prophet Abraham. If your mind didn't live in a void, you'd know that this terminology is standard.
He's too delusional to realise. He's also too childish to address your post, which is spot on. He will ignore it and try to forget it. A tactic very common with fundamentalists. They might not be right, but their ability to ignore is what wins them the debate.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Here's some more proof:

Daniel 7:13
I was watching in [b]the night visions
, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him.

It was night. Then he saw the sun rise with the clouds following it.

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

The sun is everlasting (to the ancients), and it is the father of light.

Proverbs 30:4
Who has ascended into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son’s name, If you know?

The sun ascends and decends throught the year, between the solstices. The sun is what moves the winds and the waters. The sun also lets us see [establishes] the ends of the world.

Can't wait for JIA to post more Jesus stuff. So many coincidences.

Also, Isiah 9:6 is talking about Joseph. I'm glad he said that actually.

Joseph -- miracle birth, 12 brothers, betrayed by brother Judah, sold for 20 pieces of silver by Judah, helped his brothers along with others etc.
Jesus -- miracle birth, 12 disciples, betrayed by disciple Judas, sold for 30 pieces of silver by Judas, helped his disciples along with others etc.

It's seems like the Jesus story is a recycled version of the Joseph story, don't you think? [/B]

No, actually, he didn't see the sun. These were visions. Not him seeing physical things. The word heavens refers to both the night and day sky. There is no mention of light. Therefore, you are making a ridiculous stretch.

Everlasting Father, refers directly to God. The sun is not considered everlasting to the Jews. It was known to them that all would pass away. Everlasting to the Jews had two distinctions from the sun. The God preceded the sun and will outlast it. Eternity in Biblical thought always includes preceding and outlasting.

This only speaks of a single ascension and decent. Jesus descended once and ascended once. Therefore, it cannot apply to the sun. The rest of the verse speaks of creation not control of the weather. Read it. The establishment (ie. creation) of the ends of the earth, the garment binding the waters (ie. the creation of landmasses as per the creation account).

Next, the twelve disciples and the twelve sons are intentionally similar. The twelve sons each became a tribe of Israel. Jesus chose twelve disciples to represent the twelve tribes of Israel. That is not coincidence, that is by design. Joseph's birth was not miraculous. Joseph hardly helped his brothers. In fact, he tortured his family for a while before repenting. Jesus didn't really help his disciples. They followed Him, that is not similar in any way. And those are different numbers, so there is no connection. However, Judas's price was the result of another prophecy.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
There are at lest 388 contradictions in the bible.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html

Those purported contradictions are prima facie to the uninformed, but there are answers to each one (see my thread on Bible Contradictions: http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=449986).

However, the contradictions that exist between the Bible and the Qu'ran are actual, true, genuinely irreparable contradictions because they cannot be resolved or explained outside of the fact that they exist because the Bible and the Qu'ran are not from the same divine Source.

Originally posted by lord xyz
He's too delusional to realise. He's also too childish to address your post, which is spot on. He will ignore it and try to forget it. A tactic very common with fundamentalists. They might not be right, but their ability to ignore is what wins them the debate.

I have responded to all of your posts (many of them a waste of my time simply because I had to rehash information that I had already submitted to you numerous times in various ways without your acknowledment of those facts).

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Those purported contradictions are prima facie to the uninformed, but there are answers to each one (see my thread on Bible Contradictions: http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=449986).

However, the contradictions that exist between the Bible and the Koran are actual, true, genuinely irreparable contradictions because they cannot be resolved or explained outside of the fact that they exist because the Bible and the Koran are not from the same divine Source.

Both the bible and the Koran have something very impotent in common. They are both reported to be the words of God.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I have responded to all of your posts (many of them a waste of my time simply because I had to rehash information that I had already submitted to you numerous times in various ways without your acknowledment of those facts).

But, you didn't respond to mine, which is what he is complaining about.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Both the bible and the Koran have something very impotent in common. They are both reported to be the words of God.

But one actually is the Word of God: i.e. the Bible.

Originally posted by Alliance
That trio has been grouped together for a very long time. Why? They are all monotheistic, they more or less share the same prophets and all trace their origin back to the prophet Abraham. If your mind didn't live in a void, you'd know that this terminology is standard.

Grouping apples, oranges, and bananas together for a very long time does not make them related nor does it make them one and the same.

They might all be monotheistic but there is only one true God. There is only one true God, and one authentic path to Him. Just as there is only one true JesusIsAlive on this forum, there is only one true God in this universe. There may be many imposters and charlatans but there is only only one true God seated in Heaven (and His Name is not Allah). The God of the Bible is the true God of the universe, and His Name is YHWH.

My mind does not live in a void.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But one actually is the Word of God: i.e. the Bible.

well if you can get me a video tape of god handing jesus the god damn bible ill believe every word you say. until then ima believe that a human wrote it. k? see logical ppl like to use something we like to call "proof". not a generally excepted statement. if people still thought like that we'd still believe the earth is the center of the universe. thats why there's test JIA. guess what nopositive results for proof of god.