Interesting video. My favourite bit is the last 30 seconds 😉
Categories: Christian extremism, Islamophobia, Missionaries
97 replies
Trackbacks
- How did Allah’s Makr (scheme, plotting, trickery, deception) doom the enemies of Christ (The Jews), when the disciples who believed in Him and His death and Deity, became the victorious ones? (in contrast to Islamic claims) | Apologetics and Agape
- How did Allah’s Makr (scheme, plotting, trickery, deception) doom the enemies of Christ (The Jews), when the disciples who believed in Him and His death and Deity, became the victorious ones? (in contrast to Islamic claims) | Apologetics and Agape
- How did Allah’s Makr (scheme, plotting, trickery, deception) doom the enemies of Christ (The Jews), when the disciples who believed in Him and His death and Deity, became the victorious ones? (in contrast to Islamic claims) | Apologetics and Agape
- How did Allah’s Makr (scheme, plotting, trickery, deception) doom the enemies of Christ (The Jews), when the disciples who believed in Him and His death and Deity, became the victorious ones? (in contrast to Islamic claims) | Apologetics and Agape
- How did Allah’s Makr (scheme, plotting, trickery, deception) doom the enemies of Christ (The Jews), when the disciples who believed in Him and His death and Deity, became the victorious ones? (in contrast to Islamic claims) | Apologetics and Agape
- How did Allah’s Makr (scheme, plotting, trickery, deception) doom the enemies of Christ (The Jews), when the disciples who believed in Him and His death and Deity, became the victorious ones? (in contrast to Islamic claims) | Apologetics and Agape
Blogging Theology 
ويمكرون ويمكر الله والله خير الماكرين
LikeLike
meaning?
LikeLike
they plotted and planned…
LikeLiked by 1 person
ويمكرون ويمكر الله والله خير الماكرين
And they plan and Allah (also) plans ..and Allah is the best (of) the planners… (Q 8:30)
Allah always Speaks the Truth.
LikeLiked by 1 person
والله خير الماكرين
and Allah is the very best deceiver/ trickster / schemer
I can read that.
LikeLike
very pagan missionary.
And [remember, O Muhammad], when those who disbelieved plotted against you to restrain you or kill you or evict you [from Makkah]. But they plan, and Allah plans. And Allah is the best of planners.
Allah turned their makr on them , you man worshipping christian.
LikeLiked by 3 people
in theology God controls everything. has power over everything, even flesh gods who are visible and play magic tricks by appearing as gardeners.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is Allah able to sin or do an injustice?
LikeLike
That’s like asking what time it is where God is. Silly.
Just how ignorant are you of theology?
LikeLiked by 2 people
It’s planner you moron.
If you stoped being a polytheistic pagan for just a second then perhaps you would stop spouting the regurgitated crap from the echo chambers of your Christians anonymous group.
What’s even funnier is that even if we were to humour you and alllw your lie it would read that god “deceived” the evil doers from committing sins / murder etc. You don’t think that God did this all over the bible and all of its sequels according to the Christian corrupted scriptures? Did god not lead Pharaoh and his followers to their destruction?
LikeLiked by 2 people
“We have this word in Farsi also, ظاهر – “obvious”, “manifest”, “clear”. the problem with your analysis is that when both Surah 61:14 and 3:55 are studied together, 3:55 uses another word, Foq فوق , which we also have, “above”, “high”, “uppermost”, “superior”,
when your god failed to come back a second time, you change the story and try to have him fullfill bits and bobs, but when it comes to understanding the quran, you give no wiggle room?
you are a hypocrite ken.
“above” means dominant and many numbers?
does it always have to mean this
?
LikeLike
no; the weight of evidence in both Ayehs in the Qur’an (3:55 and 61:14) along with history and Christian theology proves you and the Qur’an are wrong, since those 2 Ayehs contradict the claims of Islam makes about itself in regard to the Deity of Christ, the cross and resurrection and the doctrine of the Trinity. Those 2 verses prove the followers of Jesus were those who affirmed the Death and Resurrection, Deity of Christ, and Trinity.
Even Yusuf Ali, the translator and commentator on one of the most widely used English translations of the Qur’an, on page 1742 in the footnote on Surah 61:14 says:
after noting that enemies of Christ (The Jews, who plotted, schemed, deceived, etc. and thought they crucified Al Masih, 4:157, 3:54) were defeated, “Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus in 70 AD, and the Jews been scattered ever since. . . . On the other hand, those who followed Jesus permeated the Roman Empire, brought many new races within their circle, and throughout the Roman Empire, Christianity became the dominant religion of the world until the advent of Islam.”
LikeLike
if i said to someone “john was electrocuted and buried”
would it be natural to assume that after death all bodies get buried or john was buried???
LikeLike
@Ken
Jeremiah 4:10English Standard Version (ESV)
10 Then I said, “Ah, Lord God, surely you have utterly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, ‘It shall be well with you,’ whereas the sword has reached their very life.”
Ezekiel 14:9-11English Standard Version (ESV)
9 And if the prophet is deceived and speaks a word, I, the Lord, have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand against him and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.
1 Kings 22:20-22English Standard Version (ESV)
20 and the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ 22 And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’
LikeLike
Jeremiah is talking about of his emotions in Jer. 4:10, questioning God, but Jeremiah was wrong to say that.
The other passages –
John Piper answers the issue well. In the Bible, those passages mean that God allowed others to do the lying/deceiving, but God does not do the lying Himself. But in the passages about Allah doing the Makr in the Qur’an, it is Allah Himself who is doing the Makr.
http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/does-god-lie
LikeLike
”
John Piper answers the issue well. In the Bible, those passages mean that God allowed others to do the lying/deceiving, but God does not do the lying Himself.”
“Then the Lord[c] said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do it.’ 23 So you see, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has decreed disaster for you.”
who shall make them succeed? what will succeed ? go out and do what?
who gave authority to succeed ?
LikeLike
وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ
Qur’an Surah 3:54
LikeLike
If the case of Ismael is true as the video shows, then this verse shouldn’t be a problem for you.
It means :
If christians think that they can deceive Allah by these evil plans, then they have to realize that they did a big mistake! Someone had already known their evil plans, and He will drag them to same hole that they dug. Allah is the best.
LikeLike
“and “the Messiah will be cut off” (Daniel 9:25-26) is parallel with the suffering servant “He will be cut off” in Isaiah 53:8.”
in is 53 “cut off” does not mean death.
LikeLike
yes it does
“cut off from the land of the living” = death
LikeLike
“Is Allah able to sin or do an injustice?”
how does doing ismul faa3il MAAkir on shayateen mean “able to sin ” or “do an injustice” ?
LikeLike
“Is Allah able to sin or do an injustice?”
so God makes it seem to the enemy that they are winning and their evil plan is succeeding , but then it dooms them. so when God made it seem like they are winning was He doing sin? no He wasn’t .
LikeLike
How did it doom them when those disciples and followers of Jesus really believed Jesus died on the cross, was buried, and then rose from the dead, and the Qur’an says that they (the disciples of Jesus) became the uppermost فوق ، , superior, victorious, and manifest ظاهرین ? They grew for over 300 years under persecution and then won over the Roman Empire – who did it doom them? They believed in the cross, atonement, resurrection, Son of God, God the Son, the Deity of Christ, the Trinity, etc.
إِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَىٰ إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَجَاعِلُ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوكَ فَوْقَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ ۖ ثُمَّ إِلَيَّ مَرْجِعُكُمْ فَأَحْكُمُ بَيْنَكُمْ فِيمَا كُنتُمْ فِيهِ تَخْتَلِفُونَ
Surah 3:55 (right after 3:54 – they plotted / schemed / tricked / deceived, and Allah plotted / schemed, and Allah is the best trickster / schemer.” etc.
SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
[Mention] when Allah said, “O Jesus, indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself and purify you from those who disbelieve and make those who follow you [in submission to Allah alone] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is your return, and I will judge between you concerning that in which you used to differ.
Surah 61:14 –
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُونُوا أَنصَارَ اللَّهِ كَمَا قَالَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ لِلْحَوَارِيِّينَ مَنْ أَنصَارِي إِلَى اللَّهِ ۖ قَالَ الْحَوَارِيُّونَ نَحْنُ أَنصَارُ اللَّهِ ۖ فَآمَنَت طَّائِفَةٌ مِّن بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ وَكَفَرَت طَّائِفَةٌ ۖ فَأَيَّدْنَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا عَلَىٰ عَدُوِّهِمْ فَأَصْبَحُوا ظَاهِرِينَ
SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
O you who have believed, be supporters of Allah , as when Jesus, the son of Mary, said to the disciples, “Who are my supporters for Allah ?” The disciples said, “We are supporters of Allah .” And a faction of the Children of Israel believed and a faction disbelieved. So We supported those who believed against their enemy, and they became dominant. ظاهرین = manifest, obvious
LikeLike
How did Allah’s Makr doom the Jews, when the Christians who believed in the Death, Diety of Christ and Trinity became the uppermost, the victorious ones, contrary to Islamic claims?
LikeLike
you are a funny man worshipping christian. dhaaahir can mean “manifest” “clear”
“apparent”
quote:
How did it doom them when those disciples and followers of Jesus really believed
we cannot trust what the nt says about the belief of these disciples
he had different disciples and not everything is recorded about them.
quran does not put a number on his disciples.
” Jesus died on the cross, was buried, and then rose from the dead,”
paul spread this lie and rumour . matthew admits that rumours can be spread wide and far even when “angel of the lord” is around .
”
and the Qur’an says that they (the disciples of Jesus) became the uppermost فوق ، , superior,
victorious, and manifest ظاهرین ? They grew for over 300 years under persecution and then won over the Roman Empire – who did it doom them? They believed in the cross, atonement, resurrection, Son of God, God the Son, the Deity of Christ, the Trinity, etc.”
those like paul are the ones who are doomed and they are under the ones who stuck to the clear, manifest and apparent teachings of esa. they are above/fowq
or this verse could be talking about muslim success
or “those who FOLLOW…” don’t know , but does “follow” here mean that the focus is on their belief of the followers?
LikeLike
The followers of Jesus were the above party among children of Israel since Allah talks about 2 parties anong children of Israel.
Those followers who were in Twahid have remained above till this day since Quran praiesd them. It’s just you think that those (muslims) were trinitarians while this is not the case.
LikeLike
“How did Allah’s Makr doom the Jews, when the Christians who believed in the Death, Diety of Christ and Trinity became the uppermost, the victorious ones, contrary to Islamic claims?”
come on you foolish man worshipping pagan christian fanatic . even in the time of the quran deifying mary was around
deifying priests and rabbies was around
do you really , really, really really think that the quran thought your pagan polytheistic 3 conscious god worshipping religion was going to be what quran’s esa had in mind ?
quran is recited in a time when flesh gods are worshipped.
do you really think quran thought that esa had your polytheistic pagan religion in mind?
who are you fooling ?
LikeLike
the Qur’an’s misunderstanding because Muhammad and early Arabs saw icons and statues of Mary; but officially, she was never part of the Trinity – but Qur’an mistakes that – Surah 5:116, which proves it is not inspired by the Almighty God.
LikeLike
if you were one of those mary worshipping christians in arabia you would think that you are the uppermost /dominant.
LikeLike
“would think” vs. Qur’an says “they became uppermost/dominant” in reality, in Qur’an viewpoint.
But history shows the Christians who all believed in the death and resurrection and Deity of Christ and the Trinity were the ones who became dominant/ manifest/
boom!
LikeLike
quote:
boom!
must have blown in your face.
LikeLike
I believe I’ve answered you perfectly.
Unfortunately, you jump from subject to another as any childish christian who are new in this field!
LikeLike
Ken Temple
December 4, 2016 • 1:10 am
“would think” vs. Qur’an says “they became uppermost/dominant” in reality, in Qur’an viewpoint.
But history shows the Christians who all believed in the death and resurrection and Deity of Christ and the Trinity were the ones who became dominant/ manifest/
boom!
I say;
The Greek/Roman were dominant in Jesus time and they have their religion of Gods coming down to love them.
The Quran is not talking about Greek/Roman who were already dominant be the Quran is talking about Jews or children of Israel and they did not know Trinity. Trinity was defined in a later councils upon councils.
Chapter 61 The Ranks سورة الصف – As-Saff: Verse 14
O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of Allah: As said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?” Said the disciples, “We are Allah’s helpers!” then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed.
———–
They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help 5:72
———–
The verse clearly addressed “children of Israel” not gentiles. Christianity is a gentile dominant religion and it was gentile that was dominant at Jesus time, so the Quran is not talking about gentile dominance but it clearly said the “Children of Israel”
The Jews who believed Jesus is prophet and not God, later converted to Islam. In the prophets time, there were some Jews and Christians who were waiting for him. Islam became dominant in some centuries and still dominant the world over because people are converting from all angles.
That is the dominance i.e. it is here to stay and grow but it does not mean military dominance or economic power.
Thanks.
LikeLiked by 2 people
No, the disciples of Jesus became dominant – that means the first Jewish Christians – Peter, John, James, Matthew, Mark, Barnabas, Paul, etc. and the second century believers onward from all nations. The dominant ones were the ones who believed Jesus is the eternal Son of God; the word of God, who became a human, His Deity, and His death and resurrection, etc.
Your view has to skip 600 years until later. the disciples of Jesus grew and became dominant – meaning Christianity and the doctrine of the Trinity and the gospel message of the NT conquered the Roman Empire by love and truth.
LikeLike
Problem with that answer is that the Jewish disciples all believed in the death and atonement of Christ on the Cross, His burial, His resurrection; His Lordship; His Deity, and His Lordship and Deity, with the Deity of the Holy Spirit (which Peter said in Acts 5:3-5) led to the doctrine of the Trinity.
Ignatius was a student of Peter, and Ignatius wrote that “Jesus is God” about 9 times in his 7 letters.(around 107-110 AD) – this is Trinitarian basics. They became the dominant ones immediately in history from first century onward – the Ebionites died out and were not dominant. The disciples rejected the Ebionites as heretics.
LikeLike
“They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” (from Surah 5:72
This is another proof that the Qur’an did not know what it was talking about. The Christians never said, “God is the Messiah, the son of Mary”. the Christians said, “The Messiah is God by nature/substance/essence”, born of the virgin Mary.”
This demonstrates the Qur’an’s ignorance of the first 600 years of Christian history, and theology; and proves that the Almighty God did not inspire the Qur’an.
LikeLike
“NT conquered the Roman Empire by love and truth.”
Right ! The Roman emperor had nothing to do with it.
Even the NT has always been 27 books as it’s today among the early christianity which was spread by love.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Most of the NT books are mentioned as inspired and authoritative by Irenaeus (writing around 180-200 AD) and Tertullian (190-220 AD) and Clement of Alexandria ( 215 AD). The Christian writers before then, that we have extant (100-200 AD), also mentioned many of the NT books; but they did not write as much as Irenaeus and Tertullian.
Justin Martyr, Polycarp (1 or 2 letters), Ignatius (7 short letters), Papias (5 volumes of writings but only some fragments survive), Clement of Rome ( 1 letter) , Hermas, Didache (maybe as early as 70 AD, and Didache quotes Matthew 28:19 – “baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”) are older documents but smaller in volume, so they did not have as much material in order to know how much of the NT they had in front of them. Justin seems fully aware of John in his statements about the Logos (Word, John 1:1; 1:14) and the “memoirs of the apostles”, etc.
LikeLike
The Christians responded by love and truth usually and perseverance (not always, but overall, they were a good witness), they took care of widows, the poor, slaves, fought against abortion and infanticide, and had a high moral ethical code and affirmed the Shema of Judaism (all Trinitarians believe the Shema is true and the Trinitarian doctrine is in harmony with the Shema – “God is One”. ) These things eventually won over the Empire so that Constantine converted (whether it was totally sincere, who knows; God knows the heart) and in 312-313 AD (Edict of Milan in 313 AD) made the decision to not persecute Christians anymore.
LikeLike
exposed again :
Somewhere on your blog I read a (mis)use of Qur’an 61:14 and a response to this attempted misapplication. Christian apologists try to use this verse to show that the Qur’an confirms that the disciples of Jesus whose message won out over the others (i.e. Matthew, Mark, Peter, John, James) were the true Christians. Therefore, since these disciples also believed in the Divinity of Jesus…then Muslims are in a bind since the Qur’an seems to be either in error–and may God save us from all that–or confirming that Trinitarian Christians are the true Christians.
The confusion here–whether deviously intentional or otherwise–comes from the last word in Qur’an 61:14, which is “aZHaahireen”. This last phrase of the ayah in question has been variously translated as “…they became the ones that prevailed” (Yusuf Ali); “…they became the uppermost” (Pickthall); “…and they became uppermost” (Shakir); and “…and they became the uppermost” (Hilali/Khan). However, a quick look at “Lisan al-‘Arab”, or Lane’s Lexicon, shows that the root ZH-Ha-Ra has many, many meanings. Indeed, in Lane’s Lexicon entries for this root amount to just shy of five pages!!!
Some of the main meanings of this word are “emerged”, “became distinct from”, “became manifest”, “helpers” and “apparent”. Indeed, when learning about the interpretation of Qur’an and hadith, we are often taught we should interpret a verse with its “ZHahir”, meaning it’s “manifest” meaning, unless there’s a compelling reason to do otherwise. Even though I’ve only looked at Tafsir al-Jalalayn so far (and I plan to check the other major tafasir this evening, insha’llah), it seems to me that a more accurate (or at least another acceptable) translation would be that “…they were made distinct” (i.e. they were made distinct, or manifest from, their enemies from the Bani Isra’il who disbelieved).
This understanding of the verse could have multiple correct meanings:
1) They were distinct group from the Jews who rejected Jesus (as) during his lifetime;
2) They were distinct group from Jews who oppressed them after Jesus’ (as) ascension;
3) They were distinct group from all other groups of disbelieving Jews, including Saul of Tarsus and others.
However, in conjunction with the above it could also mean:
1) They were those who followed the “manifest”, as opposed to ambiguous, teachings of Jesus (as), as distinct from others who disbelieved since they didn’t adhere to the manifest. Is there a more succinct and accurate description of what went wrong with Trinitarian Christianity than this (i.e. the focused on ambiguous verses in order to prove their doctrines, while ignoring the manifest)?!?!? I’m sure that some more research into how the Qur’an employs words based on the root ZH-Ha-Ra would add further useful details to this.
In short, the Qur’an is telling us here just what the Christians don’t want to hear…but what history bears out. History has preserved the fact that the true followers of Jesus, which still practiced the Law and were led by James in Jerusalem, were a distinct and manifestly different group from others like Saul of Tarsus.
Now “distinct” and “manifest from” related to “their enemies”, which brings up the question whether it means ALL of their enemies or just their enemies amongst the Bani Isra’il, which is the context of the ayah. Either way would work actually, but we should bear in mind that (St.) Paul’s message, with all of its ambiguity in regards to Divinity, failed amongst the monotheistic Jews and only succeeded amongst polytheistic pagans.
LikeLike
We have this word in Farsi also, ظاهر – “obvious”, “manifest”, “clear”. the problem with your analysis is that when both Surah 61:14 and 3:55 are studied together, 3:55 uses another word, Foq فوق , which we also have, “above”, “high”, “uppermost”, “superior”, etc. – it becomes clear that the Qur’an teaches that the original disciples of Jesus became the most numerous ones, the dominant and obvious and manifest ones, and history shows theses are the followers of Jesus who preached the gospel in the first century, wrote the NT books from around 45 AD to 96 AD; believed in the atonement, crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus; believed that He was the eternal Son, the eternal Word who became human and was born of the virgin Mary, and they believed in His Deity, Lordship, Messiahship, and His Kingdom and ascension into heaven; and His Deity, with the Deity of the Holy Spirit, and the Oneness of God (God is One, Mark 12:29; 1 Timothy 2:5) all provided the basis for the formulation of the Doctrine of the Trinity. (Matthew 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14)
Peter, James, John, Paul, Barnabas all agreed with each other in doctrine from the beginning.
The Apostle Paul wrote, around 48-49 AD, right before the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15:
7 “But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised 8 (for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles), 9 and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas (Peter) and John, who werereputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 They only asked us to remember the poor—the very thing I also was eager to do.”
Galatians 2:7-10 (my emphasis)
Peter, James, John, Paul and Barnabas all agreed with each other at the Council of Jerusalem in 50 AD – Acts 15, which took place a little after Paul wrote the letter to the Galatians. (around 49 AD)
LikeLike
“No, the disciples of Jesus became dominant – that means the first Jewish Christians – Peter, John, James, Matthew, Mark, Barnabas, Paul, etc. and the second century believers onward from all nations. The dominant ones were the ones who believed Jesus is the eternal Son of God; the word of God, who became a human, His Deity, and His death and resurrection, etc.”
sorry, you are a liar. we know that according to matthew, even after having a vision of jesus “some doubted”
how many is “some” ?
or was he playing “taqia” with his face
https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/2016/05/20/jesus-the-shapeshifter-in-early-christian-tradition/
?
paul is aware of different christs
http://unveiling-christianity.net/2016/01/17/rivals-paul-followers-jesus/
what can we know about the jewish jesus who was in jewish places of worship? did he say, like modern day christians , ” i am one person from 3 and my human blood atones for sins and only way to god is not animal flesh, but by eating and drinking human being”
if we are to believe he was a “teacher”, a rabbi, would have known that which is consistent throughout his own torah that is that one man cannot atone for the sins of another.
i.e:
Exodus 32: 30-35
Deuteronomy 24:16
Jeremiah 31: 29-30
Ezekiel Chapter 18
and why trust pauline gospels?
quote:
Well the Gospels are apologetics for the crucifixion, so they do not, in themselves, have overt clues that Jesus did *not* predict his own death. They are attempts at explanations after the fact. The reasons it is thought to be unlikely that Jesus predicted his own death and resurrection (aside from the fact that most sane people do not intentionally seek out one of the most brutal and agonizing forms of execution in history) is that there was no pre-Christian expectation that the Messiah was supposed to do that. It would have made no sense within the religious or historical context of Jesus and the disciples for a Messianic aspirant to say he would die. The notion of a Messiah dying for people’s sins was a Christian redefinition of the Messiah built around a need to explain the crucifixion
end quote
LikeLike
“there was no pre-Christian expectation that the Messiah was supposed to do that. “
LOL
uh. . . except Isaiah 52:13-15; Isaiah 53:1-12 and Daniel 9:24-27 speak of the suffering servant-Messiah to come in the future and be the atonement for sin.
“to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, ” Daniel 9:24
” . . . until Messiah the Prince there will be . . . Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off (see parallel with Isaiah 53:8) and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.” (70 AD, temple was destroyed 40 years later. biggest proof!
LikeLike
Wrong Ken, Isaiah does NOT mention a messiah at all in those passages. Don’t try and deceive people.
LikeLike
Isaiah 52-53 – “My servant”
Jesus says that is about Himself. Mark 10:45
Daniel 9:24 -27 says “Messiah” twice and “the Messiah will be cut off” (Daniel 9:25-26) is parallel with Isaiah 53:8 ( He will be cut off = killed)
The concept of the Messiah is definitely there in Isaiah 52-53, even if the word is not.
The work of the Messiah to come in Daniel 9:24 is clear —
“to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, ”
No wonder the disciples of Jesus and writers of the NT and the first century Jewish Christians testified that Jesus was the Messiah, Son of God, crucified, dead, buried, resurrected, LORD, eternal Word, virgin born, etc. !!
LikeLike
FACT: those Isaiah passages never mention a messiah. Stop lying Ken. You have been caught out on this before.
LikeLike
I never claimed that Isaiah used the exact word “Messiah” – it is you who is lying.
But Daniel 9:24-27 does use “Messiah” twice and shows the purpose of the Messiah coming after those 483 years (after 69 periods of seven years) “to make end of sin, to make atonement”, etc.
and “the Messiah will be cut off” (Daniel 9:25-26) is parallel with the suffering servant “He will be cut off” in Isaiah 53:8.
And Jesus Himself claimed He was the suffering servant of Isaiah 52:13-15 adn 53:1-12 in Mark 10:45 and Matthew 20:28. (and Luke 24:25-27; 32; 44-49 proves this also)
LikeLike
Yes you said the passage mentioned a messiah. Go check you comment
LikeLike
no I did not. yes, go check it. I clearly said “the concept” is there, but the word is not. The concept means the idea of the substitutionary atonement sacrifice, that has the same concept in Daniel 9:24-27, which DOES use the word Messiah twice.
LikeLike
explain why Shabir Ally has debated David Wood about 4 or 5 times; Sammy Zaatari, Abdullah Al Andalousi, Ali Ataie, Bassam Zawadi, and Adnan Rashid and Yahya Seymour and others also.
LikeLike
“uh. . . except Isaiah 52:13-15; Isaiah 53:1-12 and Daniel 9:24-27 speak of the suffering servant-Messiah to come in the future and be the atonement for sin.”
your human sacrificial ritual cannot be derived from these texts
isaiah 53 mentions the word “messiah”
daniel thinks that yhwh would become a human sacrifice? LOL
“future”
if memory is correct isaiah 53 is in the past.
LikeLike
isaiah 53 mentions the word “messiah”
???
LikeLiked by 1 person
It doesn’t. Ken is telling fibs as usual
LikeLike
The concept of the Messiah is definitely there in Isaiah 52-53, even if the word is not.
Isaiah 52-53 – “My servant”
Jesus says that is about Himself. Mark 10:45
Daniel 9:24 -27 says “Messiah” twice and “the Messiah will be cut off” (Daniel 9:25-26) is parallel with Isaiah 53:8 ( He will be cut off = killed)
LikeLike
Not it isn’t. Do you know why most Old Testament scholars conclude that ‘servant’ refers to Israel?
LikeLike
No they don’t. the singular “he” makes that impossible; along with the descriptions of the sufferings and death.
LikeLike
Ken your ignorance of scholarship is shocking, go and learn before commentating further.
LikeLike
It was funny listening to you try and make that same argument with Nabeel Qureshi (“my scholars are better than your scholars”) and he came right back at you with quotes from John Hick, James Dunn, Raymond Brown, Larry Hurtado, Ben Witherington, etc.
LikeLike
around 8:30-8:50 Nabeel quoting John Hick right back at you. Touche!
on “the Converts Debate”, part 2.
LikeLike
did you bother reading the link on academic biblical or are you scared
let me tell you that the idea of animal sacrifice for atonement of sins is not derived from isaiah 53
the suffering servant was not an animal
the suffering servant, according to isaiah 53 was not without blemish
the suffering servant was born a human being and a sinner .
LikeLike
Read this. don’t be afraid.
https://jewsforjesus.org/issues-v02-n05/the-rabbis-dilemma-a-look-at-isaiah-53
LikeLike
But who is this Servant? Our ancient commentators with one accord noted that the context clearly speaks of God’s Anointed One, the Messiah. The Aramaic translation of this chapter, ascribed to Rabbi Jonathan ben Uzziel, a disciple of Hillel who lived early in the second century C.E., begins with the simple and worthy words:
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)
We find the same interpretation in the Babylonian Talmud:
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)
LikeLike
quote me one commentator BEFORE the rise of Christianity that says what you claim!
LikeLike
the pharisees are your interpreters you pagan. you need to make them on moses seat
LikeLike
“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)”
are you healed you pagan? you still sin. was it his sickness which cured you or his death? your god gets slain. this guy is sick
LikeLike
“by His stripes we are healed”
Isaiah 53:4-6
I Peter 2:21-25
“and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.”
I Peter 2:24
LikeLike
“and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.”
you are not healed because of slaying , but because of cuts and gashes? pagan persecutors of the suffering servant thought they were receiving healing from cuts and gashes etc?
but there is nothing in the text which says slaying brought about forgiveness or atonement. there is nothing in the text which says that the healing is divine; it could be just words from the persecutors . after they beat the shit out of the suffering servant, they feel guilty and metaphorically think that he was carrying their beatings , and then their guilt made them feel sad, not that they literally thought that it was an animal sacrifice for atonement of sins.
LikeLike
all His sufferings and His atoning death were a powerful ransom for sin. even the Qur’an affirms this truth. Surah 37:107
https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2016/10/21/so-why-did-allah-substitute-an-innocent-animal-in-the-place-of-abrahams-son/
LikeLike
Hadith also confirms this truth.
https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2014/08/23/islam-could-not-get-rid-of-the-concept-of-sacrifice-ransom-or-substitutionary-atonement/
LikeLike
that has been refuted many times Ken. Do keep up
LikeLike
“all His sufferings and His atoning death were a powerful ransom for sin. even the Qur’an affirms this truth. Surah 37:107”
i am convinced now that you are a nut job.
http://quranandbible.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/does-islam-teach-substitutionary.html
where does isaiah 53 say that the DEATH is atonement or forgiveness for sins ?
LikeLike
suffering servant suffering is not magical atonement , you are a lying nut job who is probably smoking some dangerous drugs.
there is no magical atonement like we find magical atonement in the jewish animal sacrifices.
there is no magical healing .
it is all non-literal language.
the guys suffering causes GUILT , his body does not make magical atonement and appeasement
his slaying does not make magical atonement
his suffering does not make magical atonement
his wounds and cuts do not make magical atonement
his blemished blood and sinful nature does not make magical atonement.
.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rabbi admits the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16 – hint – that is in the Torah) is parallel to Jesus
https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2013/07/07/rabbi-admits-that-the-day-of-atonement-is-parallel-to-jesus-christ/
LikeLike
Don’t know why it made 4 trackbacks !! Should be only one.
LikeLike
that’s because you are a man worshipping pagan
LikeLike
الله واحد
LikeLike
if i said to someone “john was electrocuted and buried”
would it be natural to assume that after death all bodies get buried?
LikeLike
> My favourite bit is the last 30 seconds😉
Me too!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t think anyone falls for the ‘ex-muslim’ thing nowadays.Most of the muslims have gotten used to the fake ex muslims,and even non-muslims are tired of getting refuted over and over again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“it becomes clear that the Qur’an teaches that the original disciples of Jesus became the most numerous ones, the dominant and obvious and manifest ones”
we don’t know how many were true (hawaariyoon) false, liars (peter) traitors (judas + peter)
we don’t know how it would have been possible for them to kill of a story in nazareth when they were being persecuted in jerusalem. they couldn’t have been everywhere at once.
they had no power or control over what was said. uncontrolled oral traditions could cause a lot of made up lies.
LikeLike
Yes we know the 11 Hawaariyoon حواریون were true – the book of Acts. And they spread the gospel and made many disciples.
3000 became believers – Acts 2:41
So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.
and beyond
Saul’s conversion – Acts 9, 22, 26
300 + years
won the Roman Empire under persecution.
LikeLike
Hee hee
we have that word also in Farsi.
Hawaariyoon
حواریون =
the disciples / apostles of Jesus Al Masih
LikeLike
“after noting that enemies of Christ (The Jews, who plotted, schemed, deceived, etc. and thought they crucified Al Masih, 4:157, 3:54) were defeated, “Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus in 70 AD, and the Jews been scattered ever since. . . . On the other hand, those who followed Jesus permeated the Roman Empire, brought many new races within their circle, and throughout the Roman Empire, Christianity became the dominant religion of the world until the advent of Islam.”
1. where did yusuf ali or the quran say that it was praising the beliefs of the followers or that the followers had the right beliefs?
2. why is yusuf ali’s interpretation the only correct one?
” Those 2 verses prove the followers of Jesus were those who affirmed the Death and Resurrection, Deity of Christ, and Trinity.”
where does it praise their beliefs? where does it talk about their beliefs? since your pagan beliefs were known in saudi arabia along with other breeds of it , then you must accept that quran is saying the other breeds were dominant too.
3. why does “above” have to mean dominant or many numbers?
LikeLike
it says “i will make” and this is either in present or future.
it doesn’t even have to be talking from esa’ time; it could be referring to a time AFTER esa, long time after esa. since quran knows that you cannot be follower of jesus because you are man worshipper, then i take my comment back and disagree with yusuf ali.
how can a mushrik be follower of a prophet who called to the one God?
you christians, according to the quran cannot be followers of esa. quran knows that you were making him and his mother gods and you will be exposed on d.o.j because quran says :
and I will judge between you concerning that in which you used to differ.
you cannot be followers.
LikeLike
ken, where does isaiah 53 say that bloody wounds heal?
where does it say that the slaying of the human atones for sins in isaiah 53
where does it say that the servant did not sin?
are you healed ken?
ken, can you refute this
quote:
This has probably occurred to you at some point, but do you know where else none of the words “pardon”, “forgiveness”, nor “atonement”, – the familiar “selicha, mechila, and kappara” – nor any derivative of them appear even once? Isaiah 53.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Ken
Jeremiah 4:10English Standard Version (ESV)
10 Then I said, “Ah, Lord God, surely you have utterly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, ‘It shall be well with you,’ whereas the sword has reached their very life.”
Ezekiel 14:9-11English Standard Version (ESV)
9 And if the prophet is deceived and speaks a word, I, the Lord, have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand against him and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.
1 Kings 22:20-22English Standard Version (ESV)
20 and the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ 22 And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’
LikeLike
bro/sis verdant put this video together
i am very sad with what i just seen. how is it possible one can do a complete u-turn?
LikeLike
i meant this one
LikeLike
the video i was referring to was the one which is titled “converted2 islam vs converted2ilam”
LikeLiked by 1 person
craig :
The reason that I personally have not devoted any space to a discussion of the death of Jesus by crucifixion is that this fact is not in dispute. This historical fact is not one that is controversial among biblical scholars.
kekekekeekekekekeke
baptism of craig:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2015/11/12/response-to-william-lane-craig-part-3/
LikeLike
kens gonna love this bit :
First of all, the typical Evangelical Christian will think that the Gospel accounts of the crucifixion and death of Jesus are sufficient to prove that Jesus was crucified and died on the cross. But Johnson would not agree with this assumption, because he has a more skeptical view about the historical reliability of the Gospels. Johnson compares the Gospel accounts about Jesus with the accounts that we have of Socrates, and he finds the Gospels to be more questionable and problematic than the accounts we have of Socrates:
– See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2015/11/12/response-to-william-lane-craig-part-3/#sthash.qFfnLbZt.dpuf
LikeLike