Is the Crucifixion of Jesus Really Foretold in the Old Testament?

crown-thorns

After the deity of Jesus, the crucifixion is perhaps the most contested issue about the life of Jesus between Christians and Muslims. One of the most common arguments put forward in support of the crucifixion is that it is a divinely ordained sacrifice foretold in the Old Testament over a thousand years before Jesus. In this article we are going to analyse the most popular prophecy used by Christians to propagate this idea, and how biblical prophecy in fact supports the Qur’anic perspective on the crucifixion.

THE MISINTERPRETATION OF ISAIAH 53

An argument commonly put forward to provide divine backing for the crucifixion is that it is foretold of in the Old Testament. The 53rd chapter of the Book of Isaiah is the most popular proof text put forward. Here is the chapter in full:

Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground.

He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.

Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.

But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away.

Yet who of his generation protested?

For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished.

He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.

After he has suffered, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors.

For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. [Isaiah 53:1-12]

Statements like “for the transgression of my people he was punished” and “he bore the sin of many” do, at face value, seem to bear a striking resemblance to the theology of the crucifixion. However when we analyse the entirety of this chapter, we will see that it cannot be a prophecy about Jesus. When it comes to prophecies in Scripture, you can think of each detail that the prophecy provides as a criterion that must be satisfied. So if we consider Isaiah 53 to be a prophecy about the future, then in order for it to be fulfilled by Jesus, every detail provided in the prophecy has to be satisfied by the life of Jesus as he is portrayed in the New Testament. If not, then Jesus fails as a candidate and the prophecy remains unfulfilled. We also find mention of the following in verse 10:

“…he will see his offspring and prolong his days”

The Hebrew word used for offspring, “zera”, carries the meaning of progeny and semen according to Hebrew lexicons. So in the context of this verse it means he will see his children. This can’t be a reference to Jesus as nowhere does the New Testament state that Jesus had children. Trinitarians might want to think twice before trying to argue that silence on this matter leaves the possibility that it could be true, as from their perspective, any children of Jesus may also be God-men and we’d have the troubling prospect of grandchildren of the Father. The verse above also mentions that his days will be prolonged. This statement makes no sense in light of the Trinitarian belief that Jesus is God. A mortal man’s days can be prolonged, but God is eternal. A being that is eternal cannot have their lives prolonged.

Now those who consider Isaiah 53 to be a prophecy about Jesus tend to interpret these verses metaphorically as it prevents Jesus from being ruled out as a candidate. The problem with this approach is one of inconsistency. Why interpret the mention of those things that support the crucifixion, such as suffering, literally, whereas those things that go against Jesus, such as having children and a prolonged life, are interpreted metaphorically? The suffering, offspring and prolonged days are all mentioned together within verse 10, and yet there is nothing within the context of the verse which indicates a mixture of literal and metaphorical interpretation:

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.

So to be consistent we should either interpret all the statements literally or metaphorically, rather than picking and choosing according to our desires.

So if Isaiah 53 is not talking about Jesus, then who or what is it referring to? Jewish people have historically associated the chapter with the suffering of Israel. There are even prominent Christian sources which agree with the common Jewish perspective. For example, the Harper Collins Study Bible says: “The early church identified the servant in this passage [Isaiah 52:13-53:12] with Jesus, and Jesus’ own sense of identity and mission may have been shaped by this figure. In the original historical context, however, the servant appears to have been exiled Israel.” [1] The commentary found in the Oxford Study Edition of The New English Bible associates Isaiah’s mention of death with the destruction and exile of Israel: “The crowds, pagan nations, among whom the servant (Israel) lived, speak here (through v. 9), saying that the significance of Israel’s humiliation and exaltation is hard to believe… The death probably refers to the destruction and Exile of Israel.” [2]

In fact, Isaiah 53 can be applied to any people of God that suffer. We find support for this interpretation in the Old Testament book of Jeremiah. Prophet Jeremiah faithfully communicated God’s words to the people of Israel, warning them about the impending Babylonian captivity that was sure to come unless they repented. But no one listened to him; he was rejected even by his own family: “Your relatives, members of your own family— even they have betrayed you” [Jeremiah 12:6] Jeremiah suffered more than perhaps any other prophet in the Old Testament, as he was whipped and imprisoned: “They were angry with Jeremiah and had him beaten and imprisoned in the house of Jonathan the secretary, which they had made into a prison.” [Jeremiah 37:15]Jeremiah seems to quote Isaiah 53 and applies it to himself:

table1

JESUS WOULD BE SAVED FROM THE CROSS ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE

There are verses in the Old Testament which specifically relate to the Messiah, and these explicitly rule out any possibility of the Messiah being crucified. In the New Testament, Jesus affirms an Old Testament prophecy about himself:

Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:

“‘He will command his angels concerning you,

    and they will lift you up in their hands,

    so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’”

Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’” [Matthew 4:5-7]

We can see that Satan challenged Jesus by applying an Old Testament prophecy to him. Jesus responds by affirming the prophecy (“It is also written…”). The prophecy being quoted can be found in Psalm 91:

table2

We can see that the verses of Psalm 91 mention that no harm will come to Jesus (“no harm will overtake you”), the angels will guard him (“they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone”), that God will rescue and protect him (“I will rescue him; I will protect him”), and that God will deliver him from all trouble (“will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him”). Clearly, this prophecy eliminates any possibility of a crucified Messiah. If we are going to be objective in our interpretation of Scripture, then surely the explicit words of Jesus that confirmPsalm 91 as a prophecy about himself, override the comparatively speculative Christian interpretation of Isaiah 53. So, far from there being Old Testament prophecies about the crucifixion of Jesus, there are in fact prophecies which explicitly state that the Messiah would not be harmed in any way. The only way you can arrive at a crucified Messiah in the Old Testament is to ignore explicit verses like those found in Psalm 91, and instead interpret comparatively ambiguous verses likeIsaiah 53 through the Gospel claims about the life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

THE QUR’AN REVEALS THE FULFILMENT OF MESSIANIC PROPHECY

This is what the Qur’an says about the crucifixion of Jesus:

They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, though it was made to appear like that to them; those that disagreed about him are full of doubt, with no knowledge to follow, only supposition: they certainly did not kill him. God raised him up to Himself. God is almighty and wise. [4:157-158]

We can see that the Qur’an states that Jesus was not crucified; rather it was made to appear so. What “though it was made to appear like that to them” means is a topic of discussion among scholars. Regardless of these finer details, the key point is crystal clear: God saved His beloved messenger from the humiliation, torture and death of the cross. Jesus was raised up to God, alive and unharmed, where he remains until this day.

When we analyse these claims of the Qur’an in light of Old Testament prophecy, we find that the Old Testament in fact supports the Qur’anic narrative. Recall that Psalm 91, which the New Testament endorses as a prophecy about Jesus, states that God would save the Messiah from all harm:

For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways; they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone. [Psalm 91:11-12]

This prophecy that the angels would “lift him up” matches the Qur’an which states that “God raised him up”:

table3

So we can see that the Old Testament goes against the Christian understanding and backs up the theology of the Qur’an on the Messiah not being crucified. What the Qur’an reports about Jesus is in fact the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy that the Messiah would not be harmed.

CONCLUSION

Today churches teach that Jesus was condemned to a humiliating death on the cross. Paul even wrote that Jesus was made a curse for the crucifixion: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: ‘Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.’” [Galatians 3:13] As we’ve seen, the concept of a crucified Messiah is at odds with the Old Testament. As a consequence, Jesus has long been a stumbling block to Jewish people recognising him as the Messiah. God, out of His mercy, did not leave mankind in a state of confusion. The Qur’an was revealed and unravels centuries of myth-making around Jesus and in the process bridges this millennia-old Judeo-Christian divide. Muslims love Jesus too much to believe that he was made a curse. The Qur’an says that Jesus was a blessed man: “And He has made me [Jesus] blessed wherever I am and has enjoined upon me prayer and charity as long as I remain alive” [19:31]

You can learn more about Jesus in Islam here.

References

1 – The Harper Collins Study Bible, p. 1089.

2 – The New English Bible, Oxford Study Edition, p. 788.



Categories: Bible, Christianity, God

164 replies

  1. Paul in all seriousness. Im watching the video and around 02:15:00 of Johnathans and Vlads video you seem to be taking whats called “Micro Naps”. Have you been tested for Sleep Apenia? Might want to look into that as several times in the video you demonstrated definite symptoms

    Like

  2. Did you write this Williams? I ask because I would be disappointed if you did since your zeal to disprove that Isaiah 53 speaks of Jesus you end up contradicting yourself. Note what you wrote about Isaiah 53:10:

    “… We also find mention of the following in verse 10:

    …he will see his offspring and prolong his days’

    “The Hebrew word used for offspring, “zera”, carries the meaning of progeny and semen according to Hebrew lexicons. So in the context of this verse it means he will see his children. This can’t be a reference to Jesus as nowhere does the New Testament state that Jesus had children. Trinitarians might want to think twice before trying to argue that silence on this matter leaves the possibility that it could be true, as from their perspective, any children of Jesus may also be God-men and we’d have the troubling prospect of grandchildren of the Father. The verse above also mentions that his days will be prolonged. This statement makes no sense in light of the Trinitarian belief that Jesus is God. A mortal man’s days can be prolonged, but God is eternal. A being that is eternal cannot have their lives prolonged.”

    Apart from the fact that your interpretation here has already been THOROUGHLY refuted here: http://answeringislam.net/authors/shamoun/messiahs_seed.html

    It seems you want to have your cake and eat it too, since you go on to write:

    “In fact, Isaiah 53 can be applied to any people of God that suffer. We find support for this interpretation in the Old Testament book of Jeremiah. Prophet Jeremiah faithfully communicated God’s words to the people of Israel, warning them about the impending Babylonian captivity that was sure to come unless they repented. But no one listened to him; he was rejected even by his own family: “Your relatives, members of your own family— even they have betrayed you” [Jeremiah 12:6] Jeremiah suffered more than perhaps any other prophet in the Old Testament, as he was whipped and imprisoned: “They were angry with Jeremiah and had him beaten and imprisoned in the house of Jonathan the secretary, which they had made into a prison.” [Jeremiah 37:15]Jeremiah seems to quote Isaiah 53 and applies it to himself:”

    If Isaiah 53 can be applied to Jeremiah then this pretty much obliterates your interpretation of zerah SEEING THAT JEREMIAH HAD NOT WIFE OR CHILDREN!

    “The word of the Lord came also to me, saying: YOU SHALL NOT TAKE A WIFE, NOR SHALL YOU HAVE SONS OR DAUGHTERS IN THIS PLACE. For thus says the Lord concerning the sons and concerning the daughters who are born in this place, and concerning their mothers who bore them, and concerning their fathers who fathered them in this land: They will die of deadly diseases. They will not be lamented, nor shall they be buried. But they will be as dung upon the face of the ground. And they will be consumed by the sword and by famine. And their carcasses will be food for the fowl of heaven and for the beasts of the earth.” Jeremiah 16:1-4

    So can you make up your mind? Does zerah mean that the Servant must have children or does not? And in case you want to get a little ingenious and argue that the text doesn’t deny that Jeremiah would take a wife and have children in some other place besides Jerusalem then please be so mind to quote a verse showing that he fathered children and that his line continued afterwards.

    Your appeal to Matthew 4:5-7 is another classic example of wanting to have your cake and eat it too. So Matthew is now reliable enough to establish your point. Well if that’s the case then he is also reliable enough to refute your point:

    “From that time on, Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, AND BE KILLED, AND BE RAISED ON THE THIRD DAY. Then Peter took Him and began rebuking Him, saying, ‘Far be it from You, Lord! This shall not happen to You.’ But He turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things that are of God, but those that are of men.'” Matthew 16:21-23

    “After six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother and brought them up to a high mountain alone, AND WAS TRANSFIGURED BEFORE THEM, HIS FACE SHONE AS THE SUN, AND HIS GARMENTS BECAME WHITE AS THE LIGHT. Suddenly Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him. Then Peter said to Jesus, ‘Lord, it is good for us to be here. If You wish, let us make three tabernacles here: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.’ While he was still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, ‘THIS IS MY BELOVED SON, WITH WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED. Listen to Him.’ When the disciples heard this, they fell on their faces and were filled with awe. But Jesus came and touched them and said, ‘Rise, and do not be afraid.’ When they lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only. As they came down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, ‘Tell the vision to no one UNTIL THE SON OF MAN IS RISEN FROM THE DEAD.’… While they were staying in Galilee, Jesus said to them, ‘The Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the hands of men, AND THEY WILL KILL HIM, AND HE WILL BE RAISED ON THE THIRD DAY.’ And they were extremely sorrowful.” Matthew 17:1-9, 22-23

    “As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, He took the twelve disciples aside on the road and said to them, Now we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and scribes. AND THEY WILL CONDEMN HIM TO DEATH and deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, AND TO CRUCIFY HIM, BUT ON THE THIRD DAY HE WILL RISE… even as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve AND TO GIVE HIS LIFE AS A RANSOM FOR MANY.'” Matthew 20:17-19, 28

    “As they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed it and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, ‘Take and eat. This is My body.’ Then He took the cup, and after He gave thanks, He gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you. For this is MY BLOOD of the new covenant, which is shed for many FOR THE REMISSIONS OF SINS.'” Matthew 26:26-28

    “And Jesus, when He had cried out again with a loud voice, RELEASED HIS SPIRIT. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from the top to the bottom. And the ground shook, and the rocks split apart. The graves also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had died were raised, and coming out of the graves AFTER HIS RESURRECTION, they went into the Holy City and appeared to many. When the centurion and those with him, keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they feared greatly and said, ‘TRULY HE WAS THE SON OF GOD!’ Many women who were there watching from afar followed Jesus from Galilee, serving Him, among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons. When the evening came, there came a rich man of Arimathea, named Joseph, who also was a disciple of Jesus. He went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be given to him. When Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had cut out of the rock. And he rolled a large stone to the door of the tomb and departed. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were there, sitting opposite the tomb. The next day, following the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered before Pilate, saying, ‘Sir, we remember that deceiver saying WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE [[SAM- THIS SHOWS THAT HE WAS NOW DEAD], “After three days I will rise.” Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come by night and steal Him away, and tell the people, “He has risen from the dead.” The last deception will be worse than the first.’ Pilate said to them, ‘You have a guard. Go your way. Make it as secure as you can.’ So they went and made the tomb secure by sealing the stone and posting the guard.” Matthew 27:50-66

    Could Jesus and Matthew have been any clearer in affirming the vicarious death and resurrection of Christ?

    It is ironic that you took Satan’s gross misinterpretation of Psalm 91:11-12 as your basis for denying the crucifixion when that very same Gospel goes on to show how Jesus refutes Satan’s blatant distortion of the meaning and application of that Psalm by affirming that God’s protection doesn’t preclude the fact of the Messiah dying as vicarious sacrifice for the sins of God’s people. All that this Psalm proves that there will be nothing to prevent from the Messiah from perfectly accomplishing God’s will for him to die as an atoning sacrifice and then rising from the dead to ascend into heaven as the sovereign Lord of all creation:

    “While the Pharisees were assembled, Jesus asked them, ‘What do you think of the Christ? Whose Son is He?’ They said to Him, ‘The Son of David.’ He said to them, ‘How then does David IN THE SPIRIT CALL HIM “LORD,” saying: “The Lord said to MY LORD, ‘SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, until I make Your enemies Your footstool'”? If David then CALLS HIM “LORD,” how is He his Son?'” Matthew 22:41-45

    ”But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said to Him, ‘I adjure You by the living God, tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God.’ Jesus said to him, ‘You have said so. But I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man SEATED AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER and coming on the clouds of heaven.'” Matthew 26:63-64

    “At the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. And then there was a great earthquake. For the angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone from the door and sat on it. His countenance was like lightning, and his garments white as snow. The soldiers shook for fear of him and became like dead men. The angel said to the women, ‘Do not be afraid. For I know that you are looking for Jesus who was crucified. He is not here. FOR HE IS RISEN, AS HE SAID. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. Then go quickly and tell His disciples THAT HE HAS RISEN FROM THE DEAD, and indeed, He is going before you to Galilee. There you will see Him. Listen, I have told you.’ So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to bring His disciples word. As they went to tell His disciples, SUDDENLY JESUS MET THEM, saying, ‘Greetings!’ They came AND TOOK HOLD OF HIS FEET AND WORSHIPPED HIM. Then Jesus said to them, ‘Do not be afraid. Go tell My brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see Me.’… Then the eleven disciples went away to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. When they saw Him, THEY WORSHIPPED HIM. But some doubted. Then Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘ALL AUTHORITY HAS BEEN GIVEN TO ME IN HEAVEN AND ON EARTH. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the NAME of the Father AND OF THE SON and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you. And remember, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYS, EVEN TO THE END OF THE AGE.’ Amen.” Matthew 28:1-10, 16-20

    Now can you be so kind and explain how any of this is compatible with the Quran?

    More importantly, as I had noted in a previous post even per your interpretation of Isaiah 53 this still leaves you with the problem of the Hebrew Bible affirming that the righteous can suffer and die for the sins of others, which contradicts your Islamic theology. Once again, can you kindly explain how any of this helps your cause in proving Islam is true?

    Williams, you can do much better than this. You really can.

    Like

    • Sammy the deceiving incompetent fool😂, you can do much better than this. You really can. but unfortunately you persist to be a really really a deluded incompetent fool that continuously ingnores the refutations that expose the same repetitivey armature bogus articles that reflect your false presumptions on Isaiah 53 including the misleading use of tense are all collectively dismantled in the following devastating refutation of your myths!.. as i said go play with some rabbis who will cure your of your false notions about Isaiah 53..

      we already smashed in the previous Is 53 thread havent you learnt anything you arrogant fool..!!??😁

      ignoring the devastating refutations of your bogus presumptions will not make them go away shammy

      Most Christians, like you shammy consider the Fourth Servant Song to be one of the most important so-called “proof texts” in the Christian messianic vision. With its many references to “Isaiah 53”, the New Testament provides for believing Christians a record of the fulfillment of the prophecy of a suffering and dying Messiah and his eventual return, triumph, and glory. Curiously, this is all being accepted and believed even though the common reference terms used in the Hebrew Bible for the promised Messiah, such as David, son of David, or king, are conspicuously absent from the plain text of “Isaiah 53”.

      Moreover, a suffering and dying Messiah is not part of the traditional Jewish messianic paradigm, according to which the promised future king of (a united) Israel,
      ַיחִ שָׁ מ ,shows up only once and will successfully execute the messianic agenda, as it is described in the Hebrew Bible, during his reign.

      It is interesting to note that not all Christians subscribe to this view on “Isaiah 53”.

      Several prominent Christian sources agree with the common Jewish perspective that the suffering servant in the Fourth Servant Song is a reference to collective Israel, the Jewish people. For example, Christian bibles, such as the New Revised
      Standard Version Bible (NRSV), The New Jerusalem Bible, and The Oxford Study Bible, identify Israel as the suffering servant of “Isaiah 53”.

      Apart from the fact that your interpretation shammy has already been THOROUGHLY refuted here in previous Is 53 thread…here is another devastating refutation of you twisted bogus attempt to feebly defend Is 53 referes to the Crucifixion of Jesus😂😂😂😂

      http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=41&ved=0ahUKEwi_3KObv8LNAhWDVZQKHYV3Ahw4KBAWCBkwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthejewishhome.org%2Fcounter%2FIsa53JP.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHyOngKElqOAl_IelAi6Y3EUWo2Nw

      Like

    • Pauls Pal dont you know that Paul Williams is a Zionist Muslim. He believes that Israel does not violence and never lies.

      Like

    • Br Paul dont you know thats right and sammy are milli vanilli fans.

      Like

    • No I did not write it Sam. Check the article

      Like

    • @Omar

      Oh my, if ignorance is bliss people like you are in perpetual Nirvana.

      > Quote:
      ignoring the devastating refutations of your bogus presumptions will not make them go away shammy
      >

      Sure, “devastating” as this reply when you don’t even know what the Rabbinic traditon teaches about the Messiah? Please, have some dignity.

      > Quote:
      Curiously, this is all being accepted and believed even though the common reference terms used in the Hebrew Bible for the promised Messiah, such as David, son of David, or king, are conspicuously absent from the plain text of “Isaiah 53”.
      >

      There are NO chapters in the original Hebrew writings. Chapters were introduced later for better reference. You *cannot* separate Isaiah 53 from the rest of Isaiah, is it possible that you people cannot eiither understand this simple thing? Of course you cannot (or better you don’t want) because if you did all your cherry picking to try to demonstrate whatever idiocy you can come up with would miserably fail:

      Here, look:
      A shoot will come out of the stock of Jesse, and a branch out of his roots will bear fruit. Yahweh’s Spirit will rest on him: the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Yahweh. – Isaiah 11:1-2

      The “stock of Jesse” is an *explicit* reference to the line of David, as we find in Ruth 4:22: “and Obed became the father of Jesse, and Jesse became the father of David.”

      Before opening your mouth maybe it would be better if you researched a little more on what you are talking about, is it too much too ask from you Muslims?

      > Quote:
      Moreover, a suffering and dying Messiah is not part of the traditional Jewish messianic paradigm
      >

      Lol, someone couldn’t invent such an absurdity either if he tried to. You really know absolutely anything at all of what you are talking about, do you?

      Let’s see some of these supposed “no part of the Jewish messianic paradigm” texts, shall we?(so we can have some fun):

      “The meaning of the words ‘bruised for our iniquities’ [Isaiah 53:5] is, that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of his being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer them for them himself.” – Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai – Adolf Neubauer, The Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah: According to Jewish Interpreters (New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1969), p. xl.

      “Thus the Messiah suffered on account of our sins, and was wounded; He who does not wish the Messiah to be wounded for our transgressions may choose himself to suffer and carry his own sins.” – Rabbi Elia de Vidas – See A. Lukyn Williams, Cristian Evidences, pp169-172, and Dalman, Der leidende und der sterbende Messias, pp35-39

      “What is the name of the Messiah?” The Rabbis said: His name is ‘Stricken’ as it is written, ‘Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.’ – Talmud Bavli, Soncino Editon

      “What is the cause of the mourning? The cause is Messiah the son of Joseph who was slain, and the cause is the slaying for the Evil Inclination as in the Scriptural verse, ‘And they shall look upon me’ because they have thrust him through, and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only son; but according to him who explains the cause to be the slaying of the Evil Inclination, is this [it may be objected] an occasion for mourning? Is it not rather an occasion for rejoicing? Why then should they weep? The Holy One, blessed be He, will say to the Messiah, the son of David who will redeem us in the future (May he reveal himself speedily in our days!), ‘Ask of me anything, and I will give it to thee’, as it is said, I will tell of the decree etc. this day have I begotten thee, ask of me and I will give the nations for thy inheritance. But when he will see Messiah the son of Joseph who was slain, he [Messiah son of David] will say to Him [God], ‘Lord of the Universe, I ask of Thee only the gift of life’. ‘As to life’, He would answer him, ‘Your father David has already prophesied this concerning you’, as it is said, He asked life of thee, thou gavest it him, even length of days forever and ever'” – Sukkah 52a, Soncino Edition

      “Messiah, our righteousness, hath turned from us: we are in terror and there is none to justify us! Our Iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions He did bear for He was wounded for our transgressions: He carries our sins upon His shoulders, that we may find forgiveness for our iniquities and by His stripes we are healed. O eternal One the time is come to make a new creation: from the vault of heaven bring Him up, out of Seir draw Him forth, that He may make His voice heard to us in Lebanon, a second time by the hand of Yinnon” – Yom Kippur prayer of Kether, Eliezer HaKalir

      “The children of the world are members one of another. When the Holy One desires to give healing to the world, he smites one just man amongst them, and for his sake heals all the rest. Whence do we learn this? From the saying, “‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities”‘ (Isaiah 53:5)” (Zohar, Numbers, Pinchus, 218a).

      Must I go on or is it enough?

      >Quote:
      the promised future king of (a united) Israel,
      ַיחִ שָׁ מ ,shows up only once and will successfully execute the messianic agenda, as it is described in the Hebrew Bible, during his reign
      >

      Yet again, you have no idea of what you are talking about. Daniel 9:24-27 is the most relevant text for what it concerns the background, timeline and modus operandi of the Messiah, so let’s take a look at it (from the Rabbinic tradition, since it seems this is your primary focus), shall we? Sorry for the length of the explanation but maybe you will have learned something after and you will – hopefully – save yourself another figure like this next time.

      Gabriel’s prophecy to Daniel in v24a began with the words, “Seventy sevens are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city…”. Many English versions have translated the phrase to read “seventy weeks.” But this translation is not totally accurate and has caused some confusion about the meaning of the passage along Christians while for the Rabbinic tradition what the term means is clearly established. Most Jews know the Hebrew for “weeks” because of the observance of the Feast of Weeks, and that Hebrew word is “shavuot”. However, the word that appears in the Hebrew text is “shavuim”, which means “sevens.” The word refers to a “seven” of anything, and the context determines the content of the seven.

      Here it is obvious Daniel had been thinking in terms of years—specifically the 70 years of captivity. Daniel had assumed that the captivity would end after 70 years and that the kingdom would be established after 70 years (Daniel 9:1-2). But here Gabriel was using a play upon words in the Hebrew text, pointing out that insofar as Messiah’s kingdom was concerned, it was not “70 years,” but “70 sevens of years,” a total of 490 years (70 times seven). Now the prophet was told that a total of 490 years was to be “cut out” of the Times of the Gentiles, and a 490-year period had been “determined” or “decreed” for the accomplishment of the final restoration of Israel and the establishment of Messiah’s kingdom.

      Daniel was next told by Gabriel that the 70 sevens are to accomplish six purposes (v24b). The FIRST PURPOSE is to finish transgression. The Hebrew text has this word with the definite article, so literally it means “the transgression,” or “the rebellion.” The point is that some specific act of rebellion is finally going to be completely restrained and brought to an end. This act of rebellion or transgression is to come under complete control so that it will no longer flourish. Israel’s apostasy is now to be firmly restrained, in keeping with a similar prediction in Isaiah 59:20.

      The SECOND PURPOSE of the 70 sevens is to make an end of sins. This, too, is quite in keeping with predictions by the prophets that proclaim that in the messianic kingdom, sinning would cease from Israel (Isaiah 27:9, Ezekiel 36:25-27, 37:23, Jeremiah 31:31-34).

      The THIRD PURPOSE is to make reconciliation for iniquity. The Hebrew word translated “to make reconciliation” is “kaphar,” which has the same root meaning as the word “kippur,” as in Yom Kippur. The word “kaphar” literally means “to make atonement.” The third purpose, then, is to make atonement in some way for iniquity. In fact, it is by means of this atonement that the first two purposes will also be accomplished, that of finishing the transgression and making an end of sins. The word translated “iniquity” refers to inward sin. This has sometimes been referred to as the sin nature, or perhaps a more common term among Jewish people would be yetzer hara,” the evil inclination.”

      The FOURTH PURPOSE of the 70 sevens is to bring in everlasting righteousnes. This age of righteousness is to be the messianic kingdom spoken of in the Prophets (Isaiah 1:26, 11:2-5, 32:17; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 33:15-18). It is this very age that Daniel had been expecting to see established after the 70 years of captivity, but now he is told that will only be after the 490-year period.

      The FIFTH PURPOSE is to seal up vision and prophecy. Thus, vision and prophecy are to be completely fulfilled.” Vision” is a reference to oral prophecy, while “prophecy” refers to written prophecy. Both oral and written prophecy will cease with the final fulfillment of all revelations.

      The SIXTH AND FINAL PURPOSE of the 70 sevens is to anoint the most holy. This is a reference to the Jewish temple which is to be rebuilt when Messiah comes. It refers to the same temple that Daniel’s contemporary, Ezekiel, described in great detail (Ezekiel 40-48).

      Daniel was clearly told when the 70 sevens would begin their countdown (v25a). Gabriel said, “Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.…” The 70 sevens would begin with a decree involving the rebuilding of the city of Jerusalem. One possibility here is the decree of Cyrus, issued somewhere between 538-536 B.C.E., which concerned the rebuilding of the Temple (2 Chronicles 36:22-23, Ezra 1:1-4,6:1-5) and of the city of Jerusalem (Isaiah 44:28,45:13). Another option is the decree of Darius Hystaspes (Ezra 6:6-12), issued in the year 521 B.C.E.; it was a reaffirmation of the decree of Cyrus. A third possibility is the decree of Artaxerxes to Ezra (Ezra 7:11-26) issued in 458 B.C.E., which contained permission to proceed with the temple service. The last option is the decree of Artaxerxes to Nehemiah (Nehemiah 2:1-8), issued in the year 444 B.C.E. This decree specifically concerned the rebuilding of the walls around Jerusalem. Of these four possibilities, only the first and fourth are valid in fulfilling the wording Gabriel gave to Daniel. It goes beyond the purpose of this article to deal with the various arguments of either option, but one thing is certain: BY THE YEAR 444 B.C.E. THE COUNTDOWN OF THE 70 SEVENS HAD BEGUN.

      THE FIRST 69 SEVENS:

      The 70 sevens are divided into three separate units—seven sevens, 62 sevens and one seven. During the first time period (49 years) Jerusalem would be “built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times.” The second block of time (62 sevens, a total of 434 years) immediately followed the first for a total of 69 sevens, or 483 years.

      It is at this point that we are told what the ending point is of the 69 sevens: “unto Messiah the Prince.”
      AS CLEARLY AS DANIEL COULD HAVE STATED IT, HE TAUGHT THAT 483 YEARS AFTER THE DECREE TO REBUILD JERUSALEM HAD BEEN ISSUED, MESSIAH WOULD BE HERE ON EARTH.

      The obvious conclusion is this: If Messiah was not on earth 483 years after a decree was issued to rebuild Jerusalem, then Daniel was a false prophet and his book has no business being in the Hebrew Scriptures. But if Daniel was correct and his prophecy was fulfilled, then who was the Messiah of whom he spoke?

      THE EVENTS BETWEEN THE 69TH SEVEN AND THE 70TH SEVEN (v26):

      Whereas the second subdivision of the 70 sevens was to immediately follow the first, THE THIRD SUBDIVISION WAS *NOT* TO IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW THE SECOND. Daniel pointed out (in verse 26) that three things would occur AFTER this second subdivision and before the third one. SO, YOU SEE, ALL YOU SAY THAT THERE’S NO PLACE IN SCRIPTURE OF A SEPARATE TIMING FOR THE MESSIAH IS BORN FROM YOU TOTAL IGNORANCE OF THE TOPIC.

      In verse 26, we see first that “the Messiah shall be cut off and shall have nothing.” The Hebrew word translated “cut off” is the common word used in the Mosaic Law and simply means “to be killed.” The implication of the term is that the Messiah would not only be killed, but he would die a penal death by execution. The Hebrew expression translated “and shall have nothing” has two meanings. It may mean “nothingness,” emphasizing Messiah’s state at death. It can also be translated “but not for himself,” and the meaning would then be that he died for others rather than for himself, a substitutionary death. The latter meaning would be much more consistent with what the Prophets had to say about the reason for Messiah’s death (e.g. Isaiah 53:1-12).

      The first three purposes of the 70 sevens—to finish transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity—have to be accomplished by an atonement. The Law of Moses decreed that atonement is made by blood (Leviticus 17:11). It appears that Messiah’s death “not for himself” but for others would be the means by which Israel’s transgression, sins and iniquity would be atoned for. The point of this phrase is that between the end of the second subdivision (the 69th seven) and before the start of the 70th seven, Messiah would be killed and would die a penal, substitutionary death.

      Secondly, during this interim period it would also happen that “the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood.…” The city and the temple that were to be rebuilt because of the decree by which the 70 sevens began would now be destroyed. So sometime after the Messiah was cut off, Jerusalem and the temple would suffer another destruction. Our knowledge of history during this period is extremely clear: the people responsible for this deed were the Romans, and Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed in year 70 C. E. Based upon this verse, IT IS ALSO CLEAR THAT THE MESSIAH SHOULD HAVE BOTH COME AND DIED PRIOR TO THE YEAR 70 C.E. THE QUESTION NOW IS: WHO WAS THAT MESSIAH WHO CAME AND WAS KILLED BEFORE 70 C.E.?

      The third thing to take note of would be, “and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined.” FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE INTERVAL BETWEEN THE 69TH SEVEN AND THE 70TH SEVEN, THE LAND WOULD BE CHARACTERIZED BY WAR, AND ITS RESULTING WOULD BE DESOLATION. All this would set the stage for the final, or 70th, seven.

      THE FINAL 70TH SEVEN (v27):

      From where we stand in time today, the last seven years of Daniel’s prophecy are still prophetic, still future, but it is with their conclusion that all six purposes of verse 24 will reach their fulfillment. THE IMPORTANT POINT IS THAT A CLEAR SEPARATE TIMING BETWEEN THE FINAL 70TH SEVEN TO TAKE PLACE AND THE PREVIOUS ONES, AS WE HAVE *CLEARLY* SEEN IN THE TEXT.

      See? So all you said is COMPLETELY WRONG AND I’VE USED RABBINIC INTERPRETATION (NOT CHRISTIAN) OF DANIEL 9:24-27 TO PROVE IT TO Y0U.

      Now, after this, I hope you will finally understand that your knowledge of the topic is very very low (to not say nonexistent) and so you should REALLY research on the matter a little more before pretending to be an expert on the Messiah and rabbinic interpretations on the matter.

      Like

    • Oh, and about this:

      > Quote:
      that reflect your false presumptions on Isaiah 53 including the misleading use of tense are all collectively dismantled in the following devastating refutation of your myths
      >

      Let’s take a look at Isaiah a little better to understand the context and completely dismantle your absurdities once and for all, shall we?

      —- THE TENSE OF THE TEXT, FUTURE OR PRESENT?

      First of all you NEED to start at chapter 52 because the person described in chapter 53 is just described as “he.” Who is “he”? Verse 52:13 begins the narration saying, “Behold, My servant SHALL prosper, he SHALL be exalted and extolled and be very high”. In Hebrew, the text is as follows: הִנֵּה יַשְׂכִּיל עַבְדִּי יָרוּם וְנִשָּׂא וְגָבַהּ מְאֹד. and the verb there is CLEARLY in the future tense.

      However all of the descriptions of the servant in Chapter 53 are in the past tense, it’s true, but why is it so? Why the prophecy begins with a CLEAR future tense and yet the descriptions of the servant are in the past tense? The same rabbinic tradition explains this:

      “And you should know that it is a typical behavior of the past tense verbs in the holy language to use a past tense verb in place of a future tense verb (which are the letters איתן), and this is mostly in prophecies because the matter is clear as if it passed, because it has already been decreed. This behavior is typically announced by a verb used in the future tense to introduce the prophecy, to then switch to the past tense, as to mean that the prophecy is to be taken as already happened.” – Rabbi David Kimchi, also see Sefer Mikhlol (Folio 45b) where the same thing is stated.

      SEE HOW IT WORKS? THERE’S NOTHING “STRANGE” IN IT, NO “FORGERY”, NO “MISCHIEF”; THIS IS THE WAY PROPHECY WERE WRITTEN IN THE TANAKH; IF YOU KNEW HEBREW YOU WOULD KNOW.

      SO YOU DON’T KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT THE RABBINIC TRADITIONS BUT YET YOU PRETEND TO SPEAK OF THE MATTER, ISN’T IT FUNNY?

      — NOW A LITTLE OF CONTEXT ON THE PASSAGE

      Ahaz was confronted with a dilemma. On the one hand, Rezin and Pekah were threatening the Davidic dynasty by placing the son of Tabeel on the throne. On the other hand, Assyria was vanquishing one kingdom after another. The greatest question in the minds of the royal family must have been: “What will happen to God’s promise that David’s throne shall be for all time?” But the worried King Ahaz simply would not trust in God.

      Isaiah assured him that God would give a sign to the nation of Judah that would command their trust. Since the dynasty was threatened, the people would need confidence to trust God to maintain the throne of David for “all generations.” (Edward E.Hindson 1978, Isaiah’s Immanuel, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, p. 31). Therefore, the impending sign had to answer in some way the question of what was to become of the house of David (Ibid., p. 33).

      God offered to give Ahaz a sign, either as deep as Sheol or as high as heaven, but Ahaz refused. “I will not tempt the Lord,” he seemingly protested. The fact was, Ahaz had his own way of handling the situation, through an ungodly alliance with Tiglath-pileser. (II Kings 16 records how Ahaz sent a messenger to Tiglath-pileser, offering to become his vassal. Even worse, Ahaz went to Damascus to meet the Assyrian King. He saw a pagan altar there and liked it so well that when he returned home, he had one just like it built next to Yahweh’s altar).

      Clearly, King Ahaz was not interested in a sign nor in a prophetic word from the Lord which might interfere with his own course of action. And so, from Isaiah came the sharp rebuke, “Is it too little that you weary men, that you also weary my God?”

      So the prophet addressed THE ENTIRE HOUSE OF JUDAH and promised a sign from Yahweh, since Ahaz with his unfaithfulness put scorn on the Lord. The text CLEARLY points to a sign meant for ALL the house of Judah because the pronoun here changes from l’cha, “to you” singular, to lachem, plural, CLEARLY EVIDENCING THE CHANGE OF CONTEXT.

      —- A LOOK AT THE ANCIENT RABBINIC INTERPRETATIONS OF ISAIAH 53

      Since you insist on this bullshit that the rabbinic tradition interpretation of Isaiah 53 has not to do with the Messiah, I will have, once again, to PROVE YOU TOTALLY WRONG on the matter, with various quotes from between the 2nd century to the 18th century.

      “Behold my servant Messiah shall prosper; he shall be high, and increase, and be exceeding strong: as the house of Israel looked to him through many days, because their countenance was darkened among the peoples, and their complexion beyond the sons of men.” (Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 53, ad Iocum)

      “The Messiah—what is his name?…The Rabbis say, the leprous one; those of the house of Rabbi say, the sick one, as it is said, “Surely he hath borne our sicknesses.”” (Sanhedrin 98b)

      “He is speaking of the King Messiah: “Come hither” draw near to the throne “and dip thy morsel in the vinegar,” this refers to the chastisements, as it is said, “But he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities.”” – Midrash Rabbah, in an explanation of Ruth 2:14 and Isaiah 53

      “Since the Messiah bears our iniquities which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer for them himself.” – R. Elijah de Vidas on Isaiah 53

      “I may remark, then, that our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the King Messiah, and we ourselves also adhere to the same view.” – Rabbi Moshe Alshekh (El-Sheikh) of Sefad on Isaiah 53

      “The fact is, that it refers to the King Messiah, who will come in the latter days, when it will be the Lord’s good pleasure to redeem Israel from among the different nations of the earth…..Whatever he underwent was in consequence of their own transgression, the Lord having chosen him to be a trespass-offering, like the scape-goat which bore all the iniquities of the house of Israel.” – Herz Homberg on Isaiah 53

      “Our righteous anointed is departed from us: horror hath seized us, and we have non to justify us. He hath borne the yoke of our iniquities, and our transgression, and is wounded because of our transgression. He beareth our sins on his shoulder, that he may find pardon for our iniquities. We shall be healed by his wound, at the time that the Eternal will create him (the Messiah) as a new creature. O bring him up from the circle of the earth. Raise him up from Seir, to assemble us the second time on Mount Lebanon, by the hand of Yinnon.” – The musaf (additional) service for the Day of Atonement, Philips machzor

      — SO, FROM WHERE SOME OF THE “MODERN” INTERPRETATIONS OF ISAIAH 53 COME FROM?

      The first one to introduce Isaiah 53 interpretation as referring to Israel itself was Rashi and some of his contemporaries. They knew that the older interpretations referred it to Messiah. However, Rashi lived at a time when a degenerate medieval distortion of Christianity was practiced. He wanted to preserve the Jewish people from accepting such a faith and, although his intentions were sincere, he CLEARLY interpreted the text with an agenda in mind.

      In fact other prominent Jewish rabbis and leaders realized the inconsistencies of Rashi’s interpretation. They presented a threefold objection to his innovation. First, they showed the consensus of ancient opinion. Secondly, they pointed out that the text is in the singular. Thirdly, they noted verse eight. This verse presented an insurmountable difficulty to those who interpreted this passage as referring to Israel. In fact:

      “He was taken away from rule and from judgment; and his life who shall recount? for he was cut off out of the land of the living; through the transgressions of my people was he stricken.”

      As many other rabbis made present, were the Jewish people, ever cut off out of the land of the living? No! In Jeremiah 31:35-37, God promised that we will exist forever. Jewish people are proud that Am Yisrael Chai—”The people of Israel are much alive.” Likewise, it is impossible to say that Israel suffered for the transgressions of “my people,” which clearly means Isaiah’s people. Surely Isaiah’s people are not the Gentiles, but the Jews.

      In fact let’s take a look at some of the rabbinical commentaries on the interpretation of Rashi:

      “This passage, the commentator explain, speaks of the captivity of Israel, although the singular number is used in it throughout. Others have supposed it to mean the just in this present world, who are crushed and oppressed now…but these too, for the same reason, by altering the number, distort the verses from their natural meaning. And then it seemed to me that…having forsaken the knowledge of our Teachers, and inclined “after the stubbornness of their own hearts,” and of their own opinion, I am pleased to interpret it, in accordance with the teaching of our Rabbis, of the King Messiah.” – Moshe Kohen

      “I may remark, then, that our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the King Messiah” – Rabbi Moshe Alsheikh, Rabbi of Safed

      “According to the opinion of Rashi and Ibn Ezra, it relates to Israel at the end of their captivity. But if so, what can be the meaning of the passage, “He was wounded for our transgressions”? Who was wounded? Who are the transgressors? Who carried out the sickness and bare the pain? The fact is that it refers to the King Messiah.” – Herz Homberg

      So, you see, many of the contemporaries and even future rabbis refuted and opposed the new interpretation of Rashi and they understood it as an eisegesis attempt.

      THE “MODER RABBIS” YOU SPEAK ABOUT KNOW PERFECTLY THAT THE RABBINICAL TRADITION CLEARLY INTERPRET ISAIAH 53 AS MESSIANIC. THEY INSIST IT IS NOT SO ONLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR PURELY PERSONAL INTERESTS (that are too long to explain here).

      YOU, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAVE NO MINIMAL IDEA OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. STOP PRETENDING YOU DO.

      Like

  3. His visage was marred more than any man’s. He had no form nor comeliness that we should desire him

    Like

  4. Paul why do you keep deleting the video I post?

    Like

  5. He predicted it over and over and over and when the time came for him to be delivered, his best trained followers still didn’t get it. But, he knew he had to die; for to die he was born. For all eternity he existed for that purpose: to die. He was slain before the foundation of the world. To give his life a ransom for many he put on flesh and was the perfect sacrificial lamb to pay for the sins of the world for the last and final time. His blood applied to us through his saving grace provides forgiveness for all our sins and it even cleanses us from sin; it grants us entry into the holiest place through Jesus where God lives without the taint of corruption.

    Like

    • His best trained followers still didn’t get it. But you do. Creative.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sins were freely forgiven in Judaism before Jesus. His death was not necessary.

      Like

    • “and was the perfect sacrificial lamb …”

      contradicts

      “He had no form nor comeliness that we should desire him”

      Like

    • And Jesus was not a lamb. He was a man. Why don’t Christians see the difference between 4 legs and 2?

      Like

    • Exactly. And he was no perfect sacrifice, as his throat was not slit by a priest and his blood was not sprinkled on the altar.

      But anyway, they just don’t care.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Also human sacrifice is prohibited in the Bible, that’s why they call him a lamb. But he was not a lamb. Any child can see that.

      Like

    • Paul Williams

      “Also human sacrifice is prohibited in the Bible, that’s why they call him a lamb. But he was not a lamb. Any child can see that.”

      Yawn.

      Like

    • Great reply. You really refuted my point. LOL

      Liked by 1 person

    • Okay.

      By your bizarre standard of reasoning, you have to admit that killing apostates and adulterers is human sacrifice.

      Jesus was not sacrificed by the people who killed him so your point is nonsensical just like you would claim that apostates are not killed as part of sacrifice ritual.

      The difference is that your god demands death for apostasy and if you don’t do it, he gets very upset. Jesus’ gave his life willingly – thus your murdering of apostates is more of a sacrifice to allay the anger of your god.

      Like

    • Yawn

      Shame your Jesus didn’t die for your obsessive–compulsive disorder.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Your Jesus (ie God) taught that apostates should be killed: Deuteronomy 13:6-9.

      Jesus also upheld this law in the gospels.

      Like

    • Paul Williams

      “Your Jesus (ie God) taught that apostates should be killed: Deuteronomy 13:6-9.

      Jesus also upheld this law in the gospels.”

      Deuteronomy 13:1-6

      the god of the OT would seek the death of your prophet since he tells the people to adopt pagan rituals, co-opt pagan artifacts which would have been unclean in the sight of the true god, and preaches about a god with 99 personalities, and a leg. Where is that revealed in the OT? Where did Moses talk about such a being? where does god speak of himself in this way in the OT? Where in the OT do god’s angels gets mistaken for demons by god’s prophets?

      That aside, 6-9 doesn’t say to kill disbelievers. It’s pretty straightforward.

      Like

  6. They had no legal authority to lay a hand on him. He wasn’t a stud, a handsome guy like David was, but he was perfect. He never sinned. They murdered an innocent man and accomplished God’s will not intending to. They believed, those who insisted he die, that the threat to their status would end once he was gone. No matter what we as humans do, we cannot thwart his efforts to do exactly as he pleases.

    Like

  7. Let me remind you of the very article from Tovia Singer that you yourself reposted here for all to read. The following excerpts are taken from Singer’s article, “Who is God’s Suffering Servant? The Rabbinic Interpretation of Isaiah 53 (https://outreachjudaism.org/gods-suffering-servant-isaiah-53/). You will see that even Singer had no choice but to admit that Isaiah DOES REFER TO THE MESSIAH SUFFERING FOR THE SINS OF THE WORLD:

    BEGIN
    RABBINIC COMMENTARIES THAT STATE ISAIAH 53 REFERS TO THE MESSIAH

    In rabbinic thought, all of God’s faithful, gentiles included (Zechariah 13:8-9), endure suffering on behalf of God (Isaiah 40:2; Zechariah 1:15). Thus, Jewish leaders of the past, such as Moses12 and Jeremiah,13) Rabbi Akiva,14 as well as future eschatological figures, SUCH AS THE MESSIAH BEN JOSEPH AND THE MESSIAH BEN DAVID, are held up in rabbinic literature as individuals who exemplify the “servant” who willingly suffers on behalf of Heaven.

    Therefore, when the Talmud (Sanhedrin 98a) describes the predicament of the messiah as he is waiting to be summoned by God, the rabbis cast him as:

    “sitting among other paupers, all of them afflicted with disease. Yet, while all the rest of them tie and untie their bandages all at once, the messiah changes his bandages one at a time, lest he is summoned for the redemption at a moment’s notice.”

    While this story may be understood allegorically, its jarring message is clear: THE MESSIAH, like other afflicted members of Israel, ENDURES THE AGONY AND TRIALS ASSIGNED TO THE FAITHFUL. However, unlike the other suffering saints who completely remove all their bandages before patiently replacing them with a fresh dressing, the messiah must methodically replace each bandage, one at a time. In other words, the messiah does not suffer more or less than other servants of God. Rather, according to the Talmud, the messiah is different from other men of God because he must be ready at a moment’s notice to usher in the deliverance of his beleaguered people. Because he is prepared to be summoned for the redemption at all times, he is never in a predicament where his bandages are fully removed.

    When Isaiah speaks of the suffering remnant of Israel, THE MESSIANIC KING IS, THEREFORE, INCLUDED. THE FINAL HEIR OF DAVID’S THRONE IS AN INTEGRAL MEMBER OF THE PIOUS OF ISRAEL. This is, according to rabbinic interpretation, the pshat, or the plain meaning of the text in Isaiah 52:13 – 53:12. Therefore, when both ancient and modern rabbinic commentators expound on the clear meaning of the text, they ascribe the suffering servant in Isaiah 53 to the nation of Israel.

    In order to shed much needed light on the famed Servant Songs, numerous rabbinic commentators hold up Jewish heroes as a paradigm of Isaiah 53’s “servant.” Accordingly, while on one hand the Talmud, Zohar, and other ancient rabbinic texts state explicitly that the “servant” of Isaiah 53 refers to the faithful of corporate Jewry,16 the same sources frequently point to renowned saints of Israel as an archetype of the Suffering Servant. These virtuous individuals include saints such as Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, THE MESSIAH SON OF JOSEPH AND DAVID – each of them embodies perfect examples of God’s servant, the righteous remnant of Israel.

    Bear in mind that the rabbinic commentary on Isaiah 53 is not dualistic or multilateral. Meaning, the sages of old did not suggest that Isaiah 53 refers to either the righteous remnant of Israel, Moses, Jeremiah, or an anointed leader. Rather, the servant in all four Servant Songs are the faithful descendants of Abraham. Isaiah 53 attests to an unprecedented worldwide repentance of all of mankind – a redemptive achievement accomplished by no other saint in history. THEREFORE, RABBINIC COMMENTATORS TEND TO LIFT UP THE MESSIAH’S NAME MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THE NAMES OF OTHER FAITHFUL SERVANTS OF GOD…

    The Midrash, however, illuminates a most profound, yet often overlooked central theme of Isaiah 53; never before in history has any servant of God brought about the mass repentance of the gentiles. Whereas the patriarch Abraham redeemed only 70 souls in Haran, THE FUTURE SCION OF THE HOUSE OF DAVID WILL USHER IN AN UNPRECEDENTED EPOCH, where gentile kings of nations will repent, as vividly described in the fourth Servant Song. In other words, THE MESSIAH WILL BRING ABOUT AN AGE WHEN THE MOST IMPORTANT FEATURE OF ISAIAH 53 WILL MATERIALIZE – the worldwide repentance of the gentiles. Whereas Moses drew only a single nation from Egypt into the service of God, the messianic king will redeem the other nations as well…

    Consequently, although various rabbinic literature highlights numerous Biblical saints whose lives exemplify the Suffering Servant of Israel in Isaiah 53, THE FUTURE MESSIAH IS HELD UP MORE FREQUENTLY AND PROMINENTLY THAN ANY OTHER PIOUS JEW IN THIS STARTLING CONTEXT; for the future anointed Davidic king will usher in this dramatic epoch in which the gentiles will repent, as outlined in Isaiah 53. In other words, the stunning narrative of the fourth Servant Song WILL BE MADE POSSIBLE BY THE REIGN OF THE MESSIAH, THE FOREMOST MEMBER OF GOD’S SUFFERING SERVANT, Israel. ONLY THE MESSIAH WILL ACCOMPLISH THIS GLOBAL ACHIEVEMENT IN THE FINAL REDEMPTION, WHICH NEITHER ABRAHAM, MOSES, OR JEREMIAH WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH. Only the messianic age will spawn worldwide repentance of the nations. Therefore, the rabbis teach,
    “My servant shall be high, and lifted up, and lofty exceedingly – he will be higher than Abraham, more exalted than Moses, loftier than the angels.”17

    In short, THE MESSIAH WILL IGNITE THE CONTRITION OF ISRAEL’S NEIGHBORS AS OUTLINED IN ISAIAH’S FOURTH SERVANT SONG.
    END

    This puts you in a dilemma since you believe Jesus is the Messiah. Seeing that even anti-Christian Jewish rabbis admit that Isaiah 53 is a prophecy which necessarily includes the Messiah, you have no choice but accept the fact that the NT documents are correct in describing the brutal death of Jesus the Messiah on the cross as a sacrifice for our sins. Therefore, why are you still a Muslim seeing that you believe that Muhammad denied the vicarious death of the Messiah Jesus?

    Like

    • You have been refuted thoroughly before that Isaiah 53 cannot apply to the biblical Jesus.

      “… Kings shall shut their mouths at him.(52:15)” What king ceased to speak because of Jesus?

      “Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great” (53:12).

      If Jesus is not great, then who are the great?
      When did Jesus ever divide a portion with the great?
      Who could divide him his portion, since he is God?

      …and he shall divide the spoil with the strong” (53:12)

      Jesus divides spoils? Would a perfectly good being be dividing spoils? Nowhere do we read that he plundered or divided spoils with the strong.
      This verse implies Jesus was not one of the strong which would contradict John 17:2 (“As thou hast given him power over all flesh”).

      …he poured out his soul to death” (53:12).

      I thought only the flesh of Jesus underwent death.
      Jesus did not die willingly for his creatures. He feared and prayed as is shown by Matt. 26:37-39 (“And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death:…and he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me…” and Matt. 27:46 (“My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

      THUS HE BORE THE SIN OF MANY
      Yet, Jesus was supposedly bear the sins all people, not just “many”.

      Like

  8. Sam, how long does it take you to write these comments? Do you think you’re accomplishing anything by it? Do you believe–way down in your very heart of hearts–that your behavior is the least bit Christlike?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Andrew why do you care and who asked for your opinion? You don’t like it then don’t read my comments and go somewhere else. Pretend to be Christ-like and turn the other cheek and go away.

      Like

    • Who asked for yours either? Are you just so brimming with spite and hate and scorn that it has to overflow sometimes onto random targets? A lot of Christian apologists are guilty of hate speech: you’re the only one I can think of who never writes *without* hatefulness. Baby Jesus is crying.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Do you need attention after losing so badly against Anthony Rogers in your debates? If so maybe I can get Rogers to give you some more needed attention by engaging you in some further debates. 😉

      Like

    • You see what I mean? Everything anyone ever says or does you see only as an opportunity for a nasty remark. I guess the only solution is to not speak to you at all.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. He was the good shepherd. The light of the world. The Alpha and the Omega. The Lamb of god. The way, the truth, the life. He was one with the father. The anointed one. The messiah. Christ. The door. The word. The high and lofty one who inhabits eternity. The bright and morning star. A friend to sinners. Redeemer. Savior of the world. A rock. God almighty. My Lord and friend. A son. A brother. He cried and thirsted and bled and died, for you and me.

    Like

    • What’s all this blood business about anyway. You forgot he was the high priest according the order of Melchizedek where no blood sacrifice is necessary.

      Like

  10. Without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sin. He bled and died to take away my sin and the sin of the whole world, for within his dying and crushed body he bore the sin of everyone.

    Like

    • “Sin” is not an independent existence. “Sinning” is just faulty human behavior. Sinning is necessary for humans because we learn by our mistakes. No one can “bear sin” of somebody else. That’s also made crystal clear in the bible. But you don’t care anyway. You seem only interested in dubious monologue.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Sinning is necessary for humans because we learn by our mistakes.”

      Good one!

      Jeffrey Dahmer learned how to season human flesh properly as part of his learning process. LOL!!!

      Like

    • D
      Evangelical extremists like yourself are basically humanophobes

      Like

    • Lol that’s funny because it’s true

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Evangelical extremists like yourself are basically humanophobes”

      What on earth does that even mean? You’re the one who claims that sinning is just a learning process – I pointed out how absurd that concept is.

      It makes sense in islam because your god may just randomly forgive Jeffrey Dahmer because, hey, he’s your god and and he has two right hands so he can jolly well do whatever he wants, even if it causes contradictions amongst his personalities. Forget justice for the people that he killed.

      Like

    • The Islamic understanding of the human condition is a realistic one. Thank God we don’t have to condemn every human being as being totally depraved.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “The Islamic understanding of the human condition is a realistic one. Thank God we don’t have to condemn every human being as being totally depraved.”

      Realistic for 7th century arabia perhaps, but for modern day people who don’t believe that sniffing the dung of Aisha’s camel confers magical powers, this view of the human condition is barbaric, and backward.

      Like

    • There is no original sin in Islam and humans are not totally depraved and condemned by God as the default position.

      Like

    • Correct. The Jewish scriptures and Islam agree. Christianity is the odd one out.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Burhanuddin1

      “There is no original sin in Islam and humans are not totally depraved and condemned by God as the default position.”

      If that is what you think the christian view is, then it is no surprise you come across as a complete fool when you talk about it.

      That aside, do you believe that humans are capable of not sinning? Going through life without ever sinning is possible? Even mohammed sinned, so if you know of anyone who never sinned in their life, then that person is greater even than your prophet.

      Like

    • It’s the misanthropic position of many “neighbor-loving as themselves” missionaries.

      “Even mohammed sinned, so if you know of anyone who never sinned in their life, then that person is greater even than your prophet.”

      You believe a sinless person is better than a repentant sinner? Well that belief goes against everything Jesus alayhi salam taught.

      Congratulations.

      Like

    • Don’t be a fool, burhan. your attempt to change the subject is transparent and embarrassing. I never said a sinless person is better than a repentant one.

      The question is simple – can we go through without sinning? And if mohhamed couldn’t do it, who can?

      Like

    • The idea humans have to be “sinless” is insane.

      If we wouldn’t sin God could not forgive us.

      Jesus taught the repentant sinner is dearer to God than the righteous one.

      Like

    • So humans cannot be sinless?

      Like

    • And who’s saying humans have to be sinless? That’s exactly what christians say – it is impossible for humans to be sinless, except one.

      Like

    • Humans make mistakes. That’s alright with a loving and merciful God. There is no need for sinlessness. There is need for honesty in repentance.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Humans make mistakes. That’s alright with a loving and merciful God. There is no need for sinlessness. There is need for honesty in repentance.”

      So you agree that humans cannot be sinless – that our natures are sinful? We are born with a natural inclination to sin? CHrsitians don;t say that there is a need for sinlessness, we say that none are sinless.

      Like

  11. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all righteousness.

    He sanctifies.

    God is good.

    Like

  12. D

    You said;

    July 13, 2016 • 10:09 am

    And who’s saying humans have to be sinless? That’s exactly what christians say – it is impossible for humans to be sinless, except one.

    I say;
    Who is that one? Jesus? you believe Jesus is God, so you are absolutely wrong to say he is the only human who does not sin.

    Do not bring a concept of God-Man to me. It is impossibility and does not exist. If you force me to take your belief of God-Man then you have opened the Pandora’s box and therefore every God-Man like Emperor Haile Selaissies, Ali, Sai Baba and many many more must be accepted because you believe in God-Man possibility.

    I am sorry, I cannot accept your God-Man alone. All God Men must be accepted because of the possibility. “How can you know that God has not revealed himself as Hindu God”? Dr. Shabbir Ally to Nabeel Quraish and Christian listeners.

    Jesus did sin because he called a woman dog. According to Ken Temple to show hatred and anger towards someone is sinful and sinfulness. Jesus sinned according to Ken Temple and Christians at large. Jesus says his enemies must be killed that has led to blood shed by Christians centuries after centuries.

    Jesus turned tables upside down. Why turn peoples table upside down? It is a sin to destroy someone’s property.

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Intellect

      You think that humans cannot be sinless? They sin because their nature is to be sinful?

      Like

    • D

      You said;
      Intellect

      You think that humans cannot be sinless? They sin because their nature is to be sinful?

      I say;
      One thing I noticed about you is that you will always say something, if even you have nothing to say or answer someone’s concerns.

      What you said above and I copied has nothing to deal with the points I raised, i.e. Jesus as a man has sinful nature and sinned by insulting and hating people and destroying people’s property with his disorderly conduct. According to the Bible he insulted people and turned tables and so Jesus did sin.

      Jesus could be arrested and put to jail today for his disorderly conduct and or property damage and hateful speech of inciting violence and terrorism.

      Thanks.

      Like

    • Intellect

      The discussion is on whether humans can be sinless. You are the one making off-topic musings.

      Like

    • D you claimed your biblical Jesus is “sinless”. You are refuted.

      The question if “humans can be sinless” is meaningless.
      Humans make mistakes. That’s alright with a loving and merciful God. There is no need for sinlessness. There is need for honesty in repentance.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “D you claimed your biblical Jesus is “sinless”. You are refuted.

      The question if “humans can be sinless” is meaningless.
      Humans make mistakes. That’s alright with a loving and merciful God. There is no need for sinlessness. There is need for honesty in repentance.”

      I haven’t been refuted in any way at all.

      Your still not getting it. No one can be sinless – that’s the christian belief, but the sins of man must have redress. If god does not redress sin and simply forgives when he wants, then justice is not served. We believe that god is absolutely just and sin has to have redress otherwise god would be unjust towards the victims of sin.

      Like

    • ” it is impossible for humans to be sinless, except one.”

      The qur’anic Jesus is less violent than the biblical one.

      Like

    • “… then justice is not served.” Justice is not served if you punish an innocent for the guilty one. Even if the innocent wants to be punished voluntarily as you claim. It is still unjust.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “… then justice is not served.” Justice is not served if you punish an innocent for the guilty one. Even if the innocent wants to be punished voluntarily as you claim. It is still unjust.”

      Not at all.

      It is perfectly loving.

      Like

    • No. It is still unjust. The innocent is punished for the guilty one. It is absurd.

      Like

    • Also, Jesus is not punished in your place. Punishment for sin is eternal damnation right? Being “dead” (actually dead and alive both at the same time) for 1 day and two nights is not the same. Even you who cannot count to 4 should be able to grasp that.

      D its your turn and another attempt to weasel out.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “No. It is still unjust. The innocent is punished for the guilty one. It is absurd.”

      It is not unjust. Absurdity occurs when your god randomly forgives and allows injustice to go without redress and still claims to be a just god.

      Like

    • Jesus never once mentioned Adam or the pretended curse and fall. He never implied his mission was to undo what Adam had done. Not one of the gospel writers uttered anything about Adam, the Curse, or Redemption.

      Like

    • Hi
      Where did you read in the bible that Jesus looked at the woman and called her dog?

      Furthermore Jesus tipping the tables over in the temple is ok why? It’s his temple!

      Mal 3:1  Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

      Mat 3:1  In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
      Mat 3:2  And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
      Mat 3:3  For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

      Mat 11:9  But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet.
      Mat 11:10  For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

      Who was John the Baptist preparing the way for? Obviously Jesus and so the question who is the Lord coming to his temple?

      Yes that’s right! Jesus.

      Like

  13. If you say you can see, your sin remains. You must first become blind.

    Like

  14. D “It is not unjust.”

    It is unjust and absurd.

    Having an innocent individual suffer punishment on a cross in order to atone for acts of mankind makes no more sense than having all mankind suffer for the acts of one man – Adam

    Liked by 1 person

    • “It is unjust and absurd.”

      LOL!!

      So says the man whose god’s eternal word get abrogated, whose eternal god changes his eternal mind and whose two right hands float around without a body chasing around after its solitary leg that’s hopping around not knowing which direction to go in.

      Like

    • Here we go. D the weasel at his best.

      Yes, unjust and absurd.

      If I robbed a bank and my father volunteered to serve my sentence, justice would not exist, even though he agreed.

      Punishing the innocent for the deeds of the guilty or accepting punishment of the innocent as atonement for the guilty’s behavior, has nothing to do with justice, regardless of who agrees.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      The circles you have to draw to make sense of your bizarro theology.

      You are unable to say that humans have no sin nature and cannot make a reasonable argument for how your god can forgive people while allowing their sins to go without redress.

      God administers justice according to his will, but he does administer justice. Your god administers justice, maybe, maybe not, who knows? Your god is an illusion, revealed in a dark cave by a being that was indistinguishable from a demon.

      Like

    • Unbelievable. Your insane ideology forces you to deny the very foundation of human ethical values.

      I “cannot make a reasonable argument for how your god can forgive people while allowing their sins to go without redress.”?

      That’s what forgiveness is all about.

      If its forgiveness, no one has to pay.

      If someone ha s to pay, it’s not forgiveness.

      Like

    • Punishing the innocent for the deeds of the guilty has nothing to do with justice.

      It isn’t even revenge, since the guilty are unscathed.

      It’s wanting blood merely for the sake of blood.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “That’s what forgiveness is all about.

      If its forgiveness, no one has to pay.

      If someone ha s to pay, it’s not forgiveness.”

      So if your god decides to forgive Jeffery Dahmer, his victims don’t get justice? Great theology that. Your god is not just and therefore cannot be the true god.

      Like

    • “So if your god decides to forgive Jeffery Dahmer, his victims don’t get justice?”

      You are an ignorant fool when it comes to knowledge about Islam.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Punishing the innocent for the deeds of the guilty has nothing to do with justice.

      It’s as if someone took my wife’s life during the night and I immediately went out and shot the first passer-by.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Punishing the innocent for the deeds of the guilty has nothing to do with justice.

      It’s as if someone took my wife’s life during the night and I immediately went out and shot the first passer-by.”

      That is so dumb even for you. LOL!!

      And your god could just randomly decide to forgive you and the guy who murdered your wife and she gets no justice. Some god. That isn’t mercy, that’s capriciousness.

      Where in the NT does it say that any passerby can serve as the atonement for sin?

      Like

    • I feel sorry for the Christian fundamentalist missionary. His belief system forces him to pervert and deny
      the very meaning of “forgiveness” and “justice”.

      D when it comes to Islam you are an ignorant fool.

      “And We place the scales of justice for the Day of Resurrection, so no soul will be treated unjustly at all.”

      Qur’an 21:47

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “D when it comes to Islam you are an ignorant fool.

      “And We place the scales of justice for the Day of Resurrection, so no soul will be treated unjustly at all.”

      Qur’an 21:47”

      Poor burhan! Your theology is internally contradictory. LOL!!!

      Your god forgives who he wants, not seeking to redress their sin, yet he administers justice. That can only mean that the sins of those forgiven are paid for by others that he chose not to forgive. Great theology that.

      Like

    • Poor D. Go and learn before you present your fallacies. But that’s too much asked for.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Poor D. Go and learn before you present your fallacies. But that’s too much asked for.”

      That’s weak. You don’t understand your own theology and your mad at me! LOL!!

      Like

    • Hey
      It’s in Islam for someone to pay the price for another correct me if I’m wrong.

      Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: A woman from the tribe of Juhaina came to the Prophet and said, “My mother had vowed to perform Hajj but she died before performing it. May I perform Hajj on my mother’s behalf?” The Prophet replied, “Perform Hajj on her behalf. Had there been a debt on your mother, would you have paid it or not? So, pay Allah’s debt as He has more right to be paid.” (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 3, bk. 29, no. 77, Khan)

      Abu Burda reported on the authority of his father that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: No Muslim would die but Allah would admit in his stead a Jew or a Christian in Hell-Fire. ‘Umar b. Abd al-‘Aziz took an oath: By One besides Whom there is no god but He, thrice that his father had narrated that to him from Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him). (Sahih Muslim, bk. 37, no. 6666, Siddique)

      Explain the narration please

      Like

  15. For God so loved you that he gave his only begotten son — to be brutally murdered, hung on wood timbers in the shape of a cross, nailed there to die, slowly, agonizingly, as his mother watched helpless to relieve his suffering– for you and me, to set us free from the bondage of sin.

    Bless God

    Like

  16. By the shedding of his blood, literally

    And I, if I be lifted up will draw all men to myself

    He bled and died to take away my sin

    Disgusting to those who are perishing

    Like

  17. D
    says to punish an innocent for the guilty one is not unjust.

    instead “It is perfectly loving.”

    The OT says God detests it.

    “Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent – the Lord detests them both.” Proverbs 17:15

    Like

  18. It is like his name. Referring to his blood creates powerful reactions. As does just the mentioning of his name, Jesus Christ, the mere discussion of his blood is provocative and zeroes in on the essence of Christianity without debating peripheral issues of less import.

    Like

    • Jesus Christ explicitly rejects a salvation theology based on atonement through a bloody human sacrifice. The gospel according to Matthew twice, in Matt 9:13 and Matt 12:7, states that Jesus said:

      “I desire mercy and not sacrifice”

      This could not be a more explicit rejection of the belief in bloody human sacrifice mythology.

      Liked by 1 person

    • the idea of a deity requiring the blood of human brings to appease his wrath is abhorrent and primitive.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. The man who came and died a criminal’s death. Alone, forsaken, almost human, he sank beneath your wisdom like a stone.

    For this purpose he came
    to buy back
    to redeem
    to pay for in full

    He became a sailor and when he knew for certain only drowning men could see him he said all men shall be sailors until the sea shall free them

    Like

  20. From eternity past he exists for that one divine reason– to shed his own red blood from the holes created by huge nails driven through the lower parts of his arms and his ankles and the vicious beatings and whippings that practically killed him before they pounded him fast to some lumber.

    He did exactly what to be treated like that? Why did they murder him, really? What had he done that really pissed them off?

    Like

    • blood sacrifice is not needed. God is forgiving and merciful.

      Liked by 1 person

    • What had he done that really pissed them off?

      Shit happens.

      Like

    • That is precisely what Christianity is. It is a bloody religion. His blood assures our entrance into relationship with a holy God. God despises sin. He hates sin. By sending his son to die a bloody death he opened the path for our redemption. Glory be to God. It is very simple. Too simple for those who insist they can see. Must lose your sight to gain his gift of salvation.

      Like

    • Dude try and make some interesting comments, this is not a forum to preach sermons

      Like

    • Why does anybody need to die for forgiveness to take place?

      Think of the example of Adam in the second chapter of the Qur’an. He sinned against God but rather than be condemned God not only forgave him but gave him the means to do so. The Qur’an provides the reason:

      “…Indeed, it is He who is the Accepting of repentance, the Merciful.” – Qur’an 2:37b

      Gods mercy therefore does not require sacrifice. This is not just the story of one man but rather the story of all of humanity. We stumble and don’t always do the right thing. God in response provides guidance:

      “We said, “Go down from it, all of you. And when guidance comes to you from Me, whoever follows My guidance – there will be no fear concerning them, nor will they grieve.” – Qur’an 2:38

      This is also very simple why do you deny it?

      Liked by 1 person

  21. D

    You said;

    July 13, 2016 • 3:20 pm

    Burhanuddin1

    “Punishing the innocent for the deeds of the guilty has nothing to do with justice.

    It’s as if someone took my wife’s life during the night and I immediately went out and shot the first passer-by.”

    That is so dumb even for you. LOL!!

    And your god could just randomly decide to forgive you and the guy who murdered your wife and she gets no justice. Some god. That isn’t mercy, that’s capriciousness.

    Where in the NT does it say that any passerby can serve as the atonement for sin?

    I say;

    -Where does it say in the OT and NT Yahweh(God) will become the messiah?

    -Where in the OT and NT does it says God will become man and die for the sins of man?

    -Where does it says the messiah will die for the sins of man? etc.

    You said;

    D

    July 13, 2016 • 2:52 pm

    Burhanuddin1

    “That’s what forgiveness is all about.

    If its forgiveness, no one has to pay.

    If someone ha s to pay, it’s not forgiveness.”

    So if your god decides to forgive Jeffery Dahmer, his victims don’t get justice? Great theology that. Your god is not just and therefore cannot be the true god.

    I say;
    I keep repeating this simple facts to Christians especially you Mr. D. Mercy does not go with Justice. Mercy cancels Justice and this is a simple fact.

    Justice at all cost means no Mercy. Forgiveness cancels Justice. If something must be punished before forgiveness, then there is no forgiveness.

    Forgiveness is free of charge. Any forgiveness that require punishment is not forgiveness. I gave you the meaning of forgiveness before and it means to show mercy and not punish anyone or anything and to not punish anyone.

    To show justice at all cost is to punish and it is not forgiveness. It is usually a pagan God that will punish at all cost and does not show mercy and that makes the God of Trinitarians looks like pagan Gods that came down to love and became God-Man.

    The God of Islam forgives free of charge and no one will be hurt. He does not owe anyone and so will not punish himself for anyone. When he forgives it cancels the justice or punishment he will inflict on the offender because the offender HAS SINCERELY REPENTED.

    It is only a wicked God who will punish at all cost before he can forgive a sincerely repentant person. Justice? Forgiveness cancels justice. How about the victims? People do suffer sickness, hunger, starvation, flood, etc. without anyone touching them. How about that pain and suffering?

    in Islam, here for test and if someone sin on you and sincerely repents that become a test to you like flood, fire, accident etc. and you can retaliate if you can or the person will be punished if he does not sincerely repents. If someone sincerely repents it cancels justice. It seems like Moses killed someone. Is he going to be punished?

    There is no evidence the people of Moses believed Jesus died or will die for their sins or they must wait for their repentance to be forgiven later.

    Thanks.

    Like

  22. And, and, we must forgive any or all those who have sinned against us– from our hesrts or we shall not receive forgiveness

    Like

    • Dude try and make some interesting comments, this is not a forum to preach sermons

      Like

    • If man can forgive from our hearts why can’t God?

      Liked by 2 people

    • If someone stabs a person and that person survives.

      Does it make sense for the stabbed person to stab himself the second time or to stab his son before he can forgive his stabber? To call your self a perfect just? Just is just.

      The Trinitarian God needs mental and psychiatric evaluation. He is sick. How do you become a perfect just by killing yourself? and not knowing forgiveness and mercy cancels justice and punishment? Justice and punishment means no mercy and forgiveness.

      Trinitarian will argue that everything about God is PERFECT so He must have perfect just. They forgot He did not have a PERFECT death by his divine part not dying. God do not die according to the Bible. Adding a man part to Jesus is not a PERFECT death but deception.

      A perfect death is not to be divine and man at the same time.

      Thanks

      Like

    • Patrice

      “If man can forgive from our hearts why can’t God?”

      But what happens to the injustices caused by sin? How does your god redress that?

      If someone kills dozens of innocent people in a suicide bombing, and your god decides to forgive that killer, how do the victims receive divine justice?

      Like

    • D punishment is not forgiveness if God punishes someone then he hasn’t forgiven them at all. I don’t know the mind of God so i can’t say what God would do to redress people that would be up to him wouldn’t it? and wouldn’t it also depend on the situation as to how God might act?

      With that in mind you ask how God would compensate victims of a suicide bombing if he chose to forgive the bomber the Qur’an has this to say:

      O you who have believed, do not consume one another’s wealth unjustly but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent. And do not kill yourselves [or one another]. Indeed, Allah is to you ever Merciful.

      And whoever does that in aggression and injustice – then We will drive him into a Fire. And that, for Allah , is [always] easy. – Qur’an 4:29-30

      Now what if that person accepted Christ as his Lord and saviour according the Bible he is born again and will go to heaven but since that persons victims may not be Christians they will all go to hell due to their sin nature. Surely that cannot be considered just.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Surely that cannot be considered just.

      I agree. D considers it perfectly loving.

      Like

    • Patrice

      I think that you are saying that islam has no provision for redressing injustice in the event of your god forgiving whomever he wills. He allows injustice to exist without redressing it.

      In short, in islam, if a suicide bomber who kills dozens is forgiven, then the injustice caused to his victims goes without any kind redress.

      Saying that you do not know how your god might deal with injustice – and sin, bizarrely – is simply another layer of the incoherent nature of the islamic god. You cannot know his essence or his nature – e.g is he a good or evil entity – and you cannot know if he is just.

      Like

    • Then you’d be wrong as I said no such thing only that i can’t give you a general answer as i am not an expert on Islam however considering the verses i cited it would seem God does not have a problem punishing people who are guilty of wrongdoing the details depend on the situation and that is beyond my capacity to explain.

      By the way i noticed you ignored my point with regards to Christianity and salvation. What would happen to the victims of the repentant murderer who were not Christians? What about victims who are alive but are not born again? What would be their redress as their attacker is now going to heaven and has had their sins forgiven?

      Like

    • Patrice

      “What would happen to the victims of the repentant murderer who were not Christians?”

      I think you would have to define what you mean by repentance. I don’t think that someone who murders has repented.

      As for non-christian victims, Paul states that the spouses of believers are saved, which suggests that god’s justice remains perfect in how he judges non-believers. But I can trust in god’s justness. Muslims cannot say the same – according to you, he can randomly choose to forgive without administering justice.

      “Then you’d be wrong as I said no such thing only that i can’t give you a general answer as i am not an expert on Islam however considering the verses i cited it would seem God does not have a problem punishing people who are guilty of wrongdoing the details depend on the situation and that is beyond my capacity to explain.”

      Which shatters the claim that the god of islam is simple. If you cannot answer a simple question like how is your god perfectly just, then your god cannot be the simpleton tawheed being muslims claim him to be.

      Like

    • Repentance as in how it is generally defined as in ‘to turn’ away from ones past actions with regret and strive to live a righteous life.

      So your answer is that if they were non-christians they would receive no justice or redress. Then upon what basis do you have to critcise anyone else for being unjust? and why do you keep putting words into my mouth by saying ‘according to you, he can randomly choose to forgive…’? That is simply a straw man.

      Finally i am disturbed to read your boast in how you can ‘explain’ Gods justice and how very good it is. However that justice is defined by the death of an innocent man while the guilty are free and as you have admitted that this justice only works for a select few. This may be easy to explain however but sometimes the most expedient path is not always the right path.

      So how would you define justice? I define it as ‘administration of the law’

      Like

    • patrice

      “Repentance as in how it is generally defined as in ‘to turn’ away from ones past actions with regret and strive to live a righteous life.”

      Which makes it hard to see how someone can be a suicide bomber and repented at the same time in the christian faith.

      “So your answer is that if they were non-christians they would receive no justice or redress. ”

      Wait, WUT?!! That’s not what I said at all. You’ll have to point out where I said that.

      “Finally i am disturbed to read your boast in how you can ‘explain’ Gods justice and how very good it is.”

      Dude, you’re disturbed because you don’t seem to have actually understood anything I wrote. Where did I say I can “explain” the true god’s justice?

      God’s justice is simple: all sins and transgressions are atoned for, so injustice is eradicated. Your god forgives at will, and ignores the injustices perpetrated by the people he forgives. Murderers love your god because he might just decide to forgive them and allow those who suffered from their sins to go without justice. thıs, your god is imperfectly just or even unjust.

      So again, it comes down to tawheed – it is not such a simple doctrine because it cannot even answer the question of your god’s justness. the whole islamic concept of god is like capricious zeus on steroids.

      Like

    • “As for non-christian victims, Paul states that the spouses of believers are saved, which suggests that god’s justice remains perfect in how he judges non-believers.”

      Seems pretty clear you are saying that only Christians will receive justice while non Christians will get nothing.

      “God’s justice is simple: all sins and transgressions are atoned for, so injustice is eradicated. Your god forgives at will, and ignores the injustices perpetrated by the people he forgives”

      So you don’t need to repent and believe the Gospel? Your point that injustice is eradicated can be very easily refuted if you just turn on the news or read a newspaper there is many an injustice taking place much of which was handed down by your Christian ancestors. Are you truly saying that there is no injustice in the world? How would you define justice?

      Like

    • Patrice

      “Seems pretty clear you are saying that only Christians will receive justice while non Christians will get nothing.”

      Okay, I see – the quote should be that spouses of believers who are disbelievers will be saved, which means that I can trust god to act justly with all.

      “So you don’t need to repent and believe the Gospel? Your point that injustice is eradicated can be very easily refuted if you just turn on the news or read a newspaper there is many an injustice taking place much of which was handed down by your Christian ancestors. Are you truly saying that there is no injustice in the world? How would you define justice?”

      Where did I say there is no injustice in the world? Dude, you just don’t seem to able to track this conversation very well, or you are moving the goalposts because you won’t admit that the islamic god permits injustice to go without redress and is in essence an unjust entity.

      No one believes that injustice is eradicated in the world until the day of judgement – unless you are some kind of islamic new ager type? Your god permits injustice even after the day of judgement – he is unjust by nature.

      Like

    • Dude your the one who said that all injustice was eradicated initially, however your clarifications of it being after the day of judgement was helpful.

      And i also have to thank you for clarifying with regards to the whole spouses thing. But it does offer an odd moment of clarity for God as he simply acted with mercy towards someone who has not been forgiven through Christs atonement. Why does God only do this on select occasions? Why not just with everyone?

      Like

    • Patrice

      “But it does offer an odd moment of clarity for God as he simply acted with mercy towards someone who has not been forgiven through Christs atonement. ”

      I think that you don’t really know or understand the doctrine of atonement as the payment for all sins, and hence, the administering of divine justice that allows god to be perfectly just and perfectly loving and perfectly merciful.

      The islamic god merely forgives without justice being administered. I think that you agree with this.

      Like

    • D it’s called “mercy” something your theology knows nothing of…

      Like

    • Killing the innocent instead of the guilty is not just. It’s not loving. It’s not merciful.

      Like

    • Hey Burhanuddin1
      Does not the God of Islam provide the Jew or Christian as ransom for the Muslim who are then cast into hellfire?

      Why should anyone pay the price for a Muslim?

      In the case of salvation of the souls of men we need to look at an interesting verse in the letter to the Romans.

      Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
      Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

      Then the bible says…

      Rom 5:17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
      Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
      Rom 5:19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

      Sin and death came into the world because of Adam and the gift of righteousness comes through Christ.

      Note verse 19.

      Like

    • Your right i don’t understand the atonement as the problem here is that you keep saying that God is merciful and that you have a simple answer (i don’t doubt that) to the problem of sin but that answer comes through the death of an innocent person dying.

      This goes against the very definition of mercy. Mercy is a noun that means to show compassion or forgiveness towards someone whom you have every ability to punish or harm. God does punish someone. His own son. Human beings seem to have the edge over God in this arena as people can and do forgive one another regularly without any kind of tribute needing to be paid to them.

      So you can continue to bash Islam and Prophet Muhammad as much as you like to avoid this painfully obvious reality but until you address this point of Gods lack of mercy then they will continue to remain hollow.

      Would you care to answer my original post?
      “If man can forgive can forgive from our hearts why can’t God?”

      Like

    • Paul Williams

      “D it’s called “mercy” something your theology knows nothing of…”

      Mercy without administering justice increases the burden of injustice on those victimized by sin – your god does that. That isn’t really merciful, it’s capricious.

      Like

    • Mercy is a higher principle than strict justice. Funny that Jesus taught this over and over and it’s only Islam that upholds Jesus’ teaching! Think of the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15. In your religion the son MUST be published – it’s only just. But Jesus and Muhammad taught that if God in his wisdom chooses he can show mercy.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul Williams

      “Mercy is a higher principle than strict justice.”

      Tell that to murder victims and their families. Plus it’s a nonsensical concept to say that perfect mercy can be qualitatively greater than perfect justice. Like comparing two infinite lengths of rope and declaring one longer than the other.

      Like

    • It’s not nonsensical. You have yet to grasp that this is Jesus’ teaching too. You reject Muhammad and Jesus and follow your own man made religion.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul Williams

      “It’s not nonsensical. You have yet to grasp that this is Jesus’ teaching too. You reject Muhammad and Jesus and follow your own man made religion.”

      It is nonsensical if you believe in a perfectly just god.

      Your mistake is to presume that even if it is a higher principle that it negates the need for justice to be administered.

      Like

    • Not my mistake. It is the teaching of Jesus and Muhammad and therefore of God Himself. Go and learn the ways of your God.

      Like

    • Jesus teaches that god is just and merciful, not that he is merciful and blows off sins when the mood takes him.

      Like

    • Have you not read Luke 15? This is a parable about God’s mercy. The father did NOT punish the son when he repented. Seems like you are in the wrong religion D

      Like

  23. Now, my friends, that is Christianity.

    Like

  24. Glory be to God. The entire bible boils down Jesus Christ and his atoning work on that damn cross 2,000 years ago. That agony. His passion. His bleeding and dying, God almighty hanging naked before the world asking Abba daddy to forgive the demonic monsters who murdered him in cold blood. If that isn’t love, the stars don’t shine.

    You likewise must forgive or your heavenly father will not forgive you

    Like

    • damn (verb)
      (in Christian belief) be condemned by God to suffer eternal punishment in hell.

      What did two beams of wood do wrong? Did Jesus die for them too? You seem to be rather obsessed with the notion of blood and death, this has forced me to air perhaps what many other people are thinking and ask you just one more question…

      Are you a vampire?

      Liked by 1 person

  25. D

    You said;

    D

    July 14, 2016 • 3:16 pm

    Patrice

    “What would happen to the victims of the repentant murderer who were not Christians?”

    I think you would have to define what you mean by repentance. I don’t think that someone who murders has repented.

    As for non-christian victims, Paul states that the spouses of believers are saved, which suggests that god’s justice remains perfect in how he judges non-believers. But I can trust in god’s justness. Muslims cannot say the same – according to you, he can randomly choose to forgive without administering justice.

    I say;
    You did not answer Patrice’s question at all. Patrice asked you, how about the victims of a murderer and rapist who are not Christians but their rapist and murderer was forgiven when he became a born again Christian?

    Your response is Pau states the spouses of believers are saved. And so what? It has nothin to do with the victims of a born again rapist and murderer who are not Christians and spouses of anyone. Your God will put them to hell in addition to what your born again rapist and murderer did for them.

    You do not think of all these stupid behaviour of your God but just to keep insulting Islam, Muslims and their God.

    Your God will not punish a born again rapist and a murderer but will put their victims rather in hell and punish them in addition to what a murderer and rapist did to them. Their murderer and rapist was not punished because he became a born again Christian.

    You are only interested other victims but not the victims of Christians. This is what Sham Shamoun does because his stomach is very big like a desert calabash and a tortoise of hell, he does not see all these things in Christianity but to insult Islam, Muslims and their God.

    We do not insult unless you insult us. We are just asking why can God become a man who dies? and God does not die together with so many absurdities in Christianity. It is not insult.

    People have been asking, Why did your prophet marry a young woman? It is not an insult to ask such a question or why do you kiss a black stone? It is not an insult.

    Sam Shanmoun with his big stomach will ignore Jesus does not love him because of that and he is a proven man to show Jesus did not die for Christians sins and start to insult Islam, Muslim and Muslims as filthy, Muslims wash their anuses so many times a day and other parts of their bodies so many times a day with soap as their religion demands.

    Sam Shamoun anus is full of shit, human waste and human excreta without washing and his hands are dirty with bacteria that causes his stomach to keep expanding with bacteria and that is filthy from his religion.

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Hey Intellect
      You said…Your God will not punish a born again rapist and a murderer but will put their victims rather in hell and punish them in addition to what a murderer and rapist did to them. Their murderer and rapist was not punished because he became a born again Christian.

      What part of the bible have you read that says that WILL NOT punish a born again murderer or rapist?

      1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.
      1Pe 4:15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men’s matters.

      The bible challenges us to take the reproach that comes with being a Christian, BUT LET NONE OF SUFFER AS A MURDERER.

      Please show in the bible where murder is condoned by God if you are born again Christian.

      There is even the testimony of John to back up I have just said.

      1Jn 3:14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.
      1Jn 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

      You want to know how can God die?

      I have a question for you…when a person dies what happens to their soul?

      Like

    • defendchrist

      You said;

      defendchrist

      July 14, 2016 • 8:22 pm

      Hey Intellect
      You said…Your God will not punish a born again rapist and a murderer but will put their victims rather in hell and punish them in addition to what a murderer and rapist did to them. Their murderer and rapist was not punished because he became a born again Christian.

      What part of the bible have you read that says that WILL NOT punish a born again murderer or rapist?

      I say;
      Sure. It is simple for me. Christians say they are saved by the blood of Jesus Christ. They say they have ticket to heaven by faith alone. Believe Jesus died for your sin by faith alone they you are saved. So, a Christian murderer will not be punished but is saved by the blood of Jesus Christ. That is Christianity. If a Christian is punished by their God when he sins, then the death of Jesus Christ is useless, clueless, aimless and shameless.

      Again, even if the murderer becomes a born again Christian, he is saved. I have heard so many Christians talking about their murderous and armed robbery past and are now pastors and all Christians believed once they are now born again, they are SAVED-means no punishment for their murderous and armed robbery past.

      Christians are not talking about the unjust or injustice involved on the past of these born again Christians and their victims but will be all over talking about victims when it comes to Islam.

      Mercy and forgiveness cancels the hell out of justice. No justice and punishment when there is Mercy and forgiveness, That is why SINCERE REPENTANCE is required.

      Punishing at all cost before forgiveness and Mercy is no forgiveness and Mercy at all but punishment.

      Thanks.

      Like

    • Hi intellect
      I think you have a wrong understanding of what Christians believe, just because a Christian says Jesus died for their sins they do not mean they now have a license to sin.

      Did you even read the verses of scripture I sent you that says NO person who has eternal life within them is a murderer…that’s while they are Christians.

      If they had murdered someone BEFORE they were Christians and they came to God and repented what DO YOU think God should do? Leave them unforgiven?

      In any case as I asked Paul how is a murderer in Islam forgiven because you seem to have a problem with Christian who has murdered in the past being forgiven, what’s the difference?

      Like

    • Hi Paul
      So all of a sudden the devil is now speaking the truth by applying Psalm 91 to Jesus? And you believe what the devil says?

      We can see that Satan challenged Jesus by applying an Old Testament prophecy to him. Jesus responds by affirming the prophecy (“It is also written…”). The prophecy being quoted can be found in Psalm 91:

      Let’s look at what really went on.

      Psa 91:11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
      Psa 91:12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.

      What the devil say?

      Luk 4:10 For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:
      Luk 4:11 And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone

      He missed out a crucial part of the verse…to keep thee IN ALL THY WAYS.

      The text is a promise to the man of God walking and doing Gods will, it was not promised to someone who would act presumptuously expecting God to protect him.

      This is what the devil was doing by quoting a verse trying to get Jesus to act presumptiously which is why Jesus responded “Do not tempt the Lord thy God”

      So please the devil is not quoting a verse for the helping Jesus it was about trying to destroy him.
      Psalm 91 has nothing to with Jesus.

      The devil quoting prophecy that relates to Jesus that’s funny you Muslims will use anything to prove your case.

      Like

  26. Hi
    In Islam how does Allah forgive rapist and murderers or rather is a Muslim forgiven for murdering people by saying God forgive me?

    Like

  27. Hi Paul
    No this is a genuine question no messing around, Imhave spoken to many Muslims that smoking drinking sleeping with outside of marriage ( that’s in Christianity too) and they say I just pray and Allah forgives me.

    So the reason why I’m asking is because I want to know if a murderer does the same thing is he forgiven too?

    Like

    • people are only forgiven if they repent.

      The Quran is full of exhortations to people to repent of their sin and receive God’s forgiveness before it is too late. Its the same teaching as Jesus (who was a Muslim prophet).

      Like

    • Now please don’t make silly comments Jesus was no Muslim the problem with Islam it has cut and paste itself into history like it is the originator when it in fact it is way behind.

      This is why we have things such as the translation movement 750AD to nearly the year 1000AD in Baghdad where all the literary works in Greek were translated into Arabic things like astrology and alchemy and the rest of the occult sciences; the subjects of the quadrivium: arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and theory of music; the entire field of Aristotelian philosophy throughout its history; metaphysics, ehtics, physics, zoology, botany, and especially logic — the Organon: all the health sciences; medicine, pharmacology, and veterinary science; [1]

      This all took place in the house of wisdom in Baghdad.

      I can’t see the Greeks or anyone else for that matter allow Muslims to walk in and take all their books and say…”have all the books you can carry” who then go back to Baghdad and have them translated into Arabic as those it was always theirs.

      Islam tries to jump into the OT to find their prophet who is not in there, then they try to mess about in the NT to find their prophet who is not in there.

      The Koran says the prophet is in the Torah and Injeel but it doesn’t mention an actual chapter and verse to prove its case.

      Like

  28. Of course Jesus was a Muslim prophet: he submitted to God. That’s what the word means.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Take it or leave it. That is Christianity. Disagree, despise, delight, demand, but that’s it.

    Like

  30. Isaiah 53 is one of the unclear, disputed “messianic” prophesies.
    There are clear explicit “messianic” prophesies in the Hebrew Bible that discuss the messianic age.
    Everyone agrees. The problem is the biblical Jesus did not usher in the messianic age as clearly described in the Hebrew scriptures. He just does not fit the bill.

    That’s why he has to come again to finish the job.
    But: Second problem, there is absolutely nothing in the Hebrew bible that the Messiah would come twice.
    He just comes once, that’s it.

    Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      LOL!!

      You’re a trip.

      “[And mention] when the angels said, “O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, “

      “And [for] their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah .”

      Your own god calls jesus the messiah.

      Like

    • Funny that you need the Qur’an to establish Jesus as the Messiah. Alhamdulillah.

      Doesn’t change the fact that the BIBLICAL Jesus does not fit the BIBLICAL bill. Sorry.

      Liked by 1 person

  31. D

    please complete the following sayings expressing Jesus’ and Muhammad’s ethical teaching.

    To put mercy before …

    Innocent like a newborn ….

    Like

  32. this whole back and forth is boring for one basic reason. Jews have been doing this for 2000 years. the christians tried to push Jesus into the prophets and the bible, the Jews did’t buy it [as they dont till today] so the christians went to the pagans and sold them the brooklyn bridge… think about it, jesus specifically gave them instructions NOT to go to the Gentiles and only unto the lost sheep of israel…. hmmmm, why didn’t they follow through… because the jews rejected their mythology because it was and is foreign to the bible. all the above “proof” texts are a bunch of garbage and were refuted 2000 years ago. in fact Nachmonodies in year 1262 debated a christian in spain and won and therefore was forced to escape. that week-long debate is around… there is no arument above that wasn’t presented then, it wasn’t convincing then and its aging isnt making a difference.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Jesus, described in the bible, isn’t the Jesus of the bible. We’ll, he wasn’t Howard Johnson?

    Like

    • The BIBLICAL Jesus does not fit the BIBLICAL bill of being the messiah. He did not usher in the messianic age as unambiguously described in the OT.

      Like

  34. Jews followed Jesus and wrote the new testament

    Like

  35. Didn’t have time to read through all the comments so I don’t know if someone’s already mentioned this but… Psalm 91 isn’t a prophecy…

    Like

  36. “An Atheist Historian Examines the Evidence for Jesus” is an interesting piece that people here should read. Part 2 deals with the crucifixion.

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. A very peculiar thing I do not usually notice.. – Blogging Theology

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: